ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court properly dismissed the petition for an order of protection upon its determination that the petitioner had failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent committed acts constituting a cognizable family offense (see, Family Ct Act § 812, 832 Fam. Ct. Act; Matter of Ross v. Ross, 152 A.D.2d 580 ). The determination of whether the respondent committed such acts was a disputed factual issue for the Family Court to resolve. As the trier of fact, its determination regarding the credibility of the witnesses is entitled to great weight (see, Matter of Campbell v. Desir, 251 A.D.2d 402 ; Matter of Platsky v. Platsky, 237 A.D.2d 610 ).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
BRACKEN, J.P., S. MILLER, THOMPSON, and FRIEDMANN, JJ., concur.