Bryan v. ESP Contracting Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bryan v. ESP Contracting Corp.

183 A.D.2d 427

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

DecidedMay 7, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 183 A.D.2d 427 (Bryan v. ESP Contracting Corp.) 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

Bryan v. ESP Contracting Corp., 183 A.D.2d 427 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Appellate Term, First Department (Ostrau, P. J., Parness and Miller, JJ.) entered on or about July 15, 1991, which reversed a judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (Bernard Burstein, J.) [428]*428entered January 29, 1990, granting plaintiff summary judgment and awarding plaintiff attorneys’ fees pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, unanimously modified, on the law, to reinstate so much of the judgment of the Civil Court as awarded plaintiff $10,000, together with interest of $750 and costs and disbursements of $172.50, and otherwise affirmed, with costs.

The contract of sale unequivocally gave plaintiff purchaser the right to cancel in the event that "the seller is unable for any reason other than purchaser’s default, to close on or before October 31, 1988”. The failure to close was not due to any default on plaintiff’s part, defendants having ordered a release of the down payment from escrow in accordance with the contract after expressly accepting the deficient mortgage commitment obtained by plaintiff. Moreover, plaintiff’s failure to obtain a commitment in the amount specified in the contract would not in any event have entitled defendants to withhold the down payment. The parties’ rights were fixed when plaintiff sent defendants a notice of cancellation, and the settlement negotiations they undertook thereafter are irrelevant (see, Flaherty v Elber Constr. Corp., 149 AD2d 655, 657). Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman, Asch and Smith, JJ.

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

— Order, Appellate Term, First Department (Ostrau, P. J., Parness and Miller, JJ.) entered on or about July 15, 1991, which reversed a judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (Bernard Burstein, J.) [428]*428entered January 29, 1990, granting plaintiff summary judgment and awarding plaintiff attorneys’ fees pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, unanimously modified, on the law, to reinstate so much of the judgment of the Civil Court as awarded plaintiff $10,000, together with interest of $750 and costs and disbursements of $172.50, and otherwise affirmed, with costs.

The contract of sale unequivocally gave plaintiff purchaser the right to cancel in the event that "the seller is unable for any reason other than purchaser’s default, to close on or before October 31, 1988”. The failure to close was not due to any default on plaintiff’s part, defendants having ordered a release of the down payment from escrow in accordance with the contract after expressly accepting the deficient mortgage commitment obtained by plaintiff. Moreover, plaintiff’s failure to obtain a commitment in the amount specified in the contract would not in any event have entitled defendants to withhold the down payment. The parties’ rights were fixed when plaintiff sent defendants a notice of cancellation, and the settlement negotiations they undertook thereafter are irrelevant (see, Flaherty v Elber Constr. Corp., 149 AD2d 655, 657). Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman, Asch and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 A.D.2d 427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryan-v-esp-contracting-corp-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack