Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Harriet L. Thompson, J.), entered October 24, 2013. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,150 and dismissed defendant's counterclaim.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, defendant's former tenant, commenced this small claims action to recover the principal sum of $1,150, the amount of her security deposit. Defendant counterclaimed to recover the sum of $5,000 for "loss of property." At a nonjury trial, defendant sought to demonstrate, among other things, that plaintiff had caused damage to the apartment. Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court which awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,150 and dismissed defendant's counterclaim.

In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (CCA 1807; see CCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). This deference applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Upon a review of the record, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see CCA 1804, 1807; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.