Present: IANNACCI, J.P., MARANO and GARGUILO, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Second District (David A. Morris, J.), entered March 13, 2013. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the sum of $1,683 .22.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover damages related to the repair of an air conditioning unit and a compressor. After a nonjury trial, the District Court awarded plaintiff the sum of $1,683.22. 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 ( see UDCA 1804, 1807; Ross v. Friedman, 269 A.D.2d 584 [2000]; Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d 125, 126 [2000] ).
The decision of a fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Claridge Gardens v. Menotti, 160 A.D.2d 544 [1990] ). 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 the demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility ( see Vizzari v. State of New York, 184 A.D.2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v. Kincade, 178 A.D.2d 510, 511 [1991] ). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court ( see Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d at 126). As the record supports the determination of the District Court, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. IANNACCI, J.P., MARANO and GARGUILO, JJ., concur.