Khomyshkin v Bay Ridge Toyota

[*1] Khomyshkin v Bay Ridge Toyota 2014 NY Slip Op 50641(U) Decided on April 7, 2014 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 7, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : WESTON, J.P., PESCE and ALIOTTA, JJ
2013-292 K C.

Igor Khomyshkin, Appellant,

against

Bay Ridge Toyota, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Katherine A. Levine, J.), entered November 19, 2012. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover for property damage to his vehicle allegedly caused by defendant. After a nonjury trial, the Civil Court dismissed the action. 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 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]).

The decision of a 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]). 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 standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126). As the record supports the Civil Court's determination, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Weston, J.P., Pesce and Aliotta, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 07, 2014