Taylor v Taylor

[*1] Taylor v Taylor 2015 NY Slip Op 50689(U) Decided on May 1, 2015 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 1, 2015
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : IANNACCI, J.P., TOLBERT and GARGUILO, JJ.
2014-260 D C

Lawrence Taylor, Appellant,

against

James Taylor, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Beacon, Dutchess County (Timothy G. Pagones, J.), entered October 28, 2013. 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 the sum of $3,100, which he claims to have loaned to defendant. After a nonjury trial, the City Court dismissed the action.

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" (UCCA 1807; see UCCA 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 City Court's determination is supported by the record and provides the parties with substantial justice (see UCCA 1804, 1807), the judgment is affirmed.

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

Decision Date: May 01, 2015