De Witt v. Patterson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Witt v. Patterson

282 A.D. 827, 122 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5039

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

DecidedJuly 9, 1953

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 282 A.D. 827 (De Witt v. Patterson) 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

De Witt v. Patterson, 282 A.D. 827, 122 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5039 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. Memorandum: The vendor here accepted late payments. Under such circumstances the forfeiture clause in the contract is waived and may not be reinstated except upon notice to the purchaser that if he does not pay the balance due within a reasonable time his contract rights are terminated. No notice was given in accordance with the terms of the contract. The oral conversation with Kloniek was not proper notice and the figure stated was $150 more than was due. Although urged by plaintiffs in their brief, the record does not show that the payment of $300.32 on December 15, 1949, was sufficient to entitle the plaintiffs to a deed under the terms of the contract. In view of this state of the record this question should be passed upon by the trial court. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment adjudging that plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed in an action to impress equitable lien on realty.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Vaughan, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.

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

Judgment reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. Memorandum: The vendor here accepted late payments. Under such circumstances the forfeiture clause in the contract is waived and may not be reinstated except upon notice to the purchaser that if he does not pay the balance due within a reasonable time his contract rights are terminated. No notice was given in accordance with the terms of the contract. The oral conversation with Kloniek was not proper notice and the figure stated was $150 more than was due. Although urged by plaintiffs in their brief, the record does not show that the payment of $300.32 on December 15, 1949, was sufficient to entitle the plaintiffs to a deed under the terms of the contract. In view of this state of the record this question should be passed upon by the trial court. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment adjudging that plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed in an action to impress equitable lien on realty.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Vaughan, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D. 827, 122 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-witt-v-patterson-nyappdiv-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack