YIXIONG CHEN v. AMERICAN EAGLE INVESTIGATIONS (2019)

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims breach of contract action to recover the sum of $ 1,500. After a nonjury trial, the Civil 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” (CCA 1807; see CCA 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).

Although plaintiff claimed that defendant did not fulfill its private investigative obligations under the parties' contract, the Civil Court found that Daniel McBride, the owner of defendant, credibly testified that defendant had performed its duties under the contract. Upon a review of the record, we find no basis to disturb the court's credibility determination, which is supported by the record. We thus conclude that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice (see CCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

PESCE, P.J., WESTON and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.