O'Connor v Stauble

Annotate this Case
[*1] O'Connor v Stauble 2015 NY Slip Op 50688(U) Decided on May 1, 2015 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 1, 2015
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : IANNACCI, J.P., TOLBERT and GARGUILO, JJ.
2014-254 RO C

Thomas O'Connor, Respondent,

against

Joan Stauble, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Clarkstown, Rockland County (Scott B. Ugell, J.), entered October 31, 2013. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,357.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover damages resulting from defendant's destruction of plaintiff's storage shed. After a nonjury trial, the Justice Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,357.

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" (UJCA 1807; see UJCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). 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).

As the Justice Court's determination is supported by the record and provides the parties with substantial justice (see UJCA 1804, 1807), the judgment is affirmed.

Iannacci, J.P., Tolbert and Garguilo, JJ., concur.


Decision Date: May 01, 2015

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.