Frostifresh Corp. v. Reynoso
This text of 54 Misc. 2d 119 (Frostifresh Corp. v. Reynoso) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
While the evidence clearly warrants a finding that the contract was unconscionable (Uniform Commercial Code, § 2-302), we are of the opinion that plaintiff should recover its net cost for the refrigerator-freezer, plus a reasonable profit, in addition to. trucking and service charges necessarily incurred and reasonable finance charges.
The judgment should be unanimously reversed, without costs, and a new trial ordered limited to an assessment of plaintiff’s damages and entry of judgment thereon.
Concur — Schwartzwald, Fanelli and Beckinella, JJ.
Judgment reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
54 Misc. 2d 119, 281 N.Y.S.2d 964, 4 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 300, 1967 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frostifresh-corp-v-reynoso-nyappterm-1967.