Custom Crafts by Bulzomi v. Frommer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Custom Crafts by Bulzomi v. Frommer

182 A.D.2d 760, 582 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6244

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

DecidedApril 20, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 182 A.D.2d 760 (Custom Crafts by Bulzomi v. Frommer) 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

Custom Crafts by Bulzomi v. Frommer, 182 A.D.2d 760, 582 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kohn, J.), entered July 2, 1990, which, inter alia, granted the petition and confirmed the award.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Although the agreement entered into by the parties violated the provisions of General Business Law § 771 requiring, inter alia, that all home improvement general contracts involving an aggregate price in excess of $500 be set forth in a signed writing, the arbitration award allowing the petitioner a recovery in quantum meruit did not violate public policy (see, CPLR 7511 [b] [1]; Matter of Board of Educ. v Arlington Teachers Assn., 78 NY2d 33; Matter of Frank v McKenna Dev. Group, 154 AD2d 674), since there was no dispute as to the existence of a contract between the parties (see, Cohon & Co. v Russell, 23 NY2d 569). Harwood, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kohn, J.), entered July 2, 1990, which, inter alia, granted the petition and confirmed the award.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Although the agreement entered into by the parties violated the provisions of General Business Law § 771 requiring, inter alia, that all home improvement general contracts involving an aggregate price in excess of $500 be set forth in a signed writing, the arbitration award allowing the petitioner a recovery in quantum meruit did not violate public policy (see, CPLR 7511 [b] [1]; Matter of Board of Educ. v Arlington Teachers Assn., 78 NY2d 33; Matter of Frank v McKenna Dev. Group, 154 AD2d 674), since there was no dispute as to the existence of a contract between the parties (see, Cohon & Co. v Russell, 23 NY2d 569). Harwood, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 A.D.2d 760, 582 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/custom-crafts-by-bulzomi-v-frommer-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack