Home/New York Court of Appeals/Caulfield v. Improved Risk Mutuals, Inc.

Caulfield v. Improved Risk Mutuals, Inc.

488 N.E.2d 833, 66 N.Y.2d 793, 497 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17930
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 12, 1985·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order reversed, with costs, and judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, reinstated for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum of Justice Stewart F. Hancock, Jr., at the Appellate Division (107 AD2d 1013, 1014-1015). We agree with the dissent below that, based upon the specific provisions of the contract and the amendments made thereto, the risk of loss passed to the purchasers upon the date of the escrow closing.

*796 Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Kaye and Alexander. Judge Titone dissents and votes to affirm for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (107 AD2d 1013). Taking no part: Judge Simons.

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

Caulfield v. Improved Risk Mutuals, Inc., 488 N.E.2d 833, 66 N.Y.2d 793, 497 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17930 (N.Y. 1985).

488 N.E.2d 833 (Caulfield v. Improved Risk Mutuals, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Xui v. Iron City Properties, Inc.
131 A.D.3d 1137 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Scartozzi v. Scartozzi
50 A.D.3d 662 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
In re the Estate of Carey
249 A.D.2d 542 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Homayouni v. Paribas
241 A.D.2d 375 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Mizuna, Ltd. v. Crossland Federal Savings Bank, AKA Crossland Savings Fsb, Royal Realty Co., a Partnership
90 F.3d 650 (Second Circuit, 1996)