280 Dobbs Ferry Rd. Gem, LLC v Shabaj

[*1] 280 Dobbs Ferry Rd. Gem, LLC v Shabaj 2020 NY Slip Op 51487(U) Decided on December 3, 2020 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 3, 2020
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : THOMAS A. ADAMS, P.J. , BRUCE E. TOLBERT, TERRY JANE RUDERMAN, JJ
2019-1432 W C

280 Dobbs Ferry Road Gem, LLC, Respondent,

against

Skender Shabaj, Appellant.

Skender Shabaj, appellant pro se. Stephen P. Dewey, for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Alphonse Naclerio, J.), entered June 13, 2019. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $300 and dismissed defendant's counterclaim.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this commercial claims action to recover $300 for damage caused by water leaking from defendant's air conditioning unit, and defendant counterclaimed to recover for loss of wages in having to come to court to defend the action. After a nonjury trial, the City Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $300 and dismissed defendant's counterclaim.

In a commercial 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-A [a]; see UCCA 1804-A; 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 [1991]). The deference normally accorded to the credibility determinations of a trial court applies with greater force in the Commercial Claims Part of the court, given the limited scope of [*2]review (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Upon a review of the record, we find that the City Court's dismissal of defendant's counterclaim and determination in favor of plaintiff rendered substantial justice between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (see UCCA 1804-A, 1807-A [a]).

We note that this court does not consider evidence which is dehors the record (see Chimarios v Duhl, 152 AD2d 508 [1989]).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

ADAMS, P.J., TOLBERT and RUDERMAN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: December 3, 2020