Rotunda v Debonis

[*1] Rotunda v Debonis 2005 NYSlipOp 51157(U) Decided on July 21, 2005 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 21, 2005
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: RUDOLPH, P.J., ANGIOLILLO and TANENBAUM, JJ.
2004-1097 P C

Frank Rotunda, Respondent,

against

William J. Debonis, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a small claims judgment of the Justice Court, Town of Patterson, Putnam County (R. Tricinelli, J.), entered on April 19, 2004, awarding plaintiff the sum of $383.

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action which plaintiff commenced against the defendant to recover damages caused when defendant's car collided with plaintiff's car, the trial court properly rendered its judgment providing the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UJCA 1804, 1807; see Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]). The
decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in small claims court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Furthermore, issues of credibility are given substantial deference as the court has the opportunity to observe and evaluate testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affording the trial court a better perspective from which to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses (McGuirk v Mugs Pub, 250 AD2d 824 [1998]). The court properly resolved the question of credibility in favor of the plaintiff.
Decision Date: July 21, 2005