Maggio Importato, Inc. v. Cimitron Inc.
This text of 189 A.D.2d 654 (Maggio Importato, Inc. v. Cimitron 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.
Opinion
—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered August 22, 1991, granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in the amount of $52,856.87, and an order of the same court, entered on or about December 6, 1991, inter alia, granting reargument but adhering to the original determination, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the IAS Court that no questions of fact exist involving defendant’s acceptance of the goods shipped by plaintiff. Defendant’s mere complaint about the goods does not constitute a clear and unequivocal act of rejection. Moreover, defendant’s use of the goods and failure to return same constituted an acceptance of the goods (UCC 2-606 [1]; Computerized Radiological Servs. v Syntex Corp., 786 F2d 72). Defendant’s acceptance of the goods, even if the goods failed to conform to the contract, entitles plaintiff to recover the con[655]*655tract price (Sunny Side Up v Agway, Inc., 40 AD2d 899). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
189 A.D.2d 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maggio-importato-inc-v-cimitron-inc-nyappdiv-1993.