Anthony S. Vergatos & Family, Inc. v. T.C. Management LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anthony S. Vergatos & Family, Inc. v. T.C. Management LLC

15 A.D.3d 222, 791 N.Y.S.2d 3, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1306

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 8, 2005·Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered September 18, 2003, which, in this action upon a contract for the sale of real property, inter alia, granted plaintiff seller’s cross motion for summary judgment as to liability, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants do not dispute that they intended to enter into the contract or that they in fact executed the contract and forwarded it to plaintiff. Rather they maintain that the contract never became binding because the contract’s delivery condition was not satisfied, the fully executed contract having been, according to defendants, misdelivered by the messenger sent by plaintiffs attorney and placed in the hands of someone other than defendants’ attorney. Under the circumstances obtaining, however, the contract was effectively delivered and became valid and binding when it was dispatched by plaintiffs attorney to the address at which defendants’ counsel had accepted mail throughout the course of the parties’ dealings (see Pais-Built Homes, Inc. v Beckett, 297 AD2d 726, 727 [2002], citing 219 Broadway Corp. v Alexander’s, Inc., 46 NY2d 506, 511-512 [1979]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Saxe, Ellerin, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered September 18, 2003, which, in this action upon a contract for the sale of real property, inter alia, granted plaintiff seller’s cross motion for summary judgment as to liability, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants do not dispute that they intended to enter into the contract or that they in fact executed the contract and forwarded it to plaintiff. Rather they maintain that the contract never became binding because the contract’s delivery condition was not satisfied, the fully executed contract having been, according to defendants, misdelivered by the messenger sent by plaintiffs attorney and placed in the hands of someone other than defendants’ attorney. Under the circumstances obtaining, however, the contract was effectively delivered and became valid and binding when it was dispatched by plaintiffs attorney to the address at which defendants’ counsel had accepted mail throughout the course of the parties’ dealings (see Pais-Built Homes, Inc. v Beckett, 297 AD2d 726, 727 [2002], citing 219 Broadway Corp. v Alexander’s, Inc., 46 NY2d 506, 511-512 [1979]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Saxe, Ellerin, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Anthony S. Vergatos & Family, Inc. v. T.C. Management LLC, 15 A.D.3d 222, 791 N.Y.S.2d 3, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1306 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

15 A.D.3d 222 (Anthony S. Vergatos & Family, Inc. v. T.C. Management LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related