Brown v. Fragrance Group, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. Fragrance Group, Ltd.

254 A.D.2d 206, 679 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11339

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 27, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 206 (Brown v. Fragrance Group, Ltd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brown v. Fragrance Group, Ltd., 254 A.D.2d 206, 679 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11339 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered April 4, 1997, which, inter alia, denied that branch of plaintiffs’ motion seeking summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiffs’ motion insofar as it seeks summary judgment and directing the entry of judgment in plaintiffs’ favor and against defendant in the principal amount of $120,000, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiffs in their letter of January 29, 1993 clearly and unequivocally offered to rescind the parties’ renewal contract, it is plain that defendant did not accept the offer of rescission but instead attempted to renegotiate the terms of the renewal contract and in so doing prevented plaintiffs from pursuing other business opportunities. The renewal contract, never having been rescinded, remained binding upon the parties and, as is here relevant, requires the payment of compensation by defendant to plaintiffs in the amount of $120,000. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered April 4, 1997, which, inter alia, denied that branch of plaintiffs’ motion seeking summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiffs’ motion insofar as it seeks summary judgment and directing the entry of judgment in plaintiffs’ favor and against defendant in the principal amount of $120,000, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiffs in their letter of January 29, 1993 clearly and unequivocally offered to rescind the parties’ renewal contract, it is plain that defendant did not accept the offer of rescission but instead attempted to renegotiate the terms of the renewal contract and in so doing prevented plaintiffs from pursuing other business opportunities. The renewal contract, never having been rescinded, remained binding upon the parties and, as is here relevant, requires the payment of compensation by defendant to plaintiffs in the amount of $120,000. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 206, 679 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-fragrance-group-ltd-nyappdiv-1998.