Green v. Bermudez-Thrush

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: June 21, 2018
• Docket: 2018 NYSlipOp 50992(U)
• Status: Published

Opinion

Stacy Green, Respondent,

against

Dianne Bermudez-Thrush, Appellant.

Dianne Bermudez-Thrush, appellant pro se. Stacy Green, respondent pro se (no brief filed).

Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Poughkeepsie, Dutchess County (Katherine A. Moloney, J.), entered December 21, 2015. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $4,770.53 for "monies due." After a nonjury trial, the City Court credited plaintiff's testimony that the money in a bank account that had been opened in defendant's name belonged to plaintiff, and that defendant had cut off plaintiff's access to the account. The court also credited defendant's witness's testimony that plaintiff owed defendant $700. Accordingly, the City Court awarded plaintiff $4,000. Defendant appeals.

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, 126 [2000]). 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 [*2]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).

Upon a review of the record, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UCCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 21, 2018