Green Realty Management Corp. v. Visions Realty, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Green Realty Management Corp. v. Visions Realty, Inc.

245 A.D.2d 147, 665 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13035

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 147 (Green Realty Management Corp. v. Visions Realty, Inc.) 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

Green Realty Management Corp. v. Visions Realty, Inc., 245 A.D.2d 147, 665 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13035 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered August 12, 1997, which granted plaintiffs motion for reargument of a prior order denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in an action seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, and, upon reargument, adhered to the prior order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While we find that defendant seller was not justified in entering a new contract, and that defendant thereafter waived the time of the essence closing dates it had set (see, Stefanelli v Vitale, 223 AD2d 361), issues of fact precluding summary judgment still remain, including which party breached the contract, and the meaning of the tax provision contained therein. Defendant’s claim that plaintiff was not ready, willing and able to purchase the property is unpreserved, and we decline to reach it. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Rubin, Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered August 12, 1997, which granted plaintiffs motion for reargument of a prior order denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in an action seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, and, upon reargument, adhered to the prior order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While we find that defendant seller was not justified in entering a new contract, and that defendant thereafter waived the time of the essence closing dates it had set (see, Stefanelli v Vitale, 223 AD2d 361), issues of fact precluding summary judgment still remain, including which party breached the contract, and the meaning of the tax provision contained therein. Defendant’s claim that plaintiff was not ready, willing and able to purchase the property is unpreserved, and we decline to reach it. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Rubin, Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 147, 665 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13035, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-realty-management-corp-v-visions-realty-inc-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack