Garbi v Doodyman To Rescue Anytime Sewer, Inc.

Annotate this Case
[*1] Garbi v Doodyman To Rescue Anytime Sewer, Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 50974(U) Decided on June 13, 2014 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on June 13, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., SOLOMON and ELLIOT, JJ.
2012-1879 Q C

Denise Garbi, Appellant,

against

Doodyman to the Rescue Anytime Sewer, Inc., CLEANING SERVICE, INC., Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Joseph E. Capella, J.), dated May 21, 2012. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover the sum of $2,000, alleging that defendant had failed to properly provide services for which plaintiff had paid defendant. After a nonjury trial, the Civil Court dismissed the complaint.

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]). As the record supports the trial court's determination, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

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


Decision Date: June 13, 2014

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.