Budd Realty Corp. v. Epstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Budd Realty Corp. v. Epstein

253 A.D. 727, 300 N.Y.S. 835, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5349

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

DecidedDecember 10, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D. 727 (Budd Realty Corp. v. Epstein) 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

Budd Realty Corp. v. Epstein, 253 A.D. 727, 300 N.Y.S. 835, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5349 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for the fixation of a lien for the amount of a down payment made in pursuance of a contract to purchase real property, for expenses in connection therewith, and for judgment in such aggregate amount, judgment dismissing the complaint unanimously affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, a question of fact was presented as to the application of the clause in plaintiff’s contract relating to “ a further accurate survey ” as including the Lockwood survey. Upon the proof adduced with respect to this ambiguous clause, it appears that the trial court resolved the issue in favor of defendants-respondents, a finding which is not against the weight of the evidence. Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur; Davis, J., concurs in result.

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

In an action for the fixation of a lien for the amount of a down payment made in pursuance of a contract to purchase real property, for expenses in connection therewith, and for judgment in such aggregate amount, judgment dismissing the complaint unanimously affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, a question of fact was presented as to the application of the clause in plaintiff’s contract relating to “ a further accurate survey ” as including the Lockwood survey. Upon the proof adduced with respect to this ambiguous clause, it appears that the trial court resolved the issue in favor of defendants-respondents, a finding which is not against the weight of the evidence. Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur; Davis, J., concurs in result.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D. 727, 300 N.Y.S. 835, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/budd-realty-corp-v-epstein-nyappdiv-1937.