Radd v. Dragos

302 A.D.2d 509, 755 N.Y.S.2d 255

This text of 302 A.D.2d 509 (Radd v. Dragos) 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
Radd v. Dragos, 302 A.D.2d 509, 755 N.Y.S.2d 255 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for specific [510]*510performance of a contract for the sale of real property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated November 14, 2001, which granted the plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction and denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that the seller’s return of the down payment does not preclude the buyer from seeking specific performance of the contract (see Kline v Apostolakos, 176 AD2d 784 [1991]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Kline v. Apostolakos
176 A.D.2d 784 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
302 A.D.2d 509, 755 N.Y.S.2d 255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/radd-v-dragos-nyappdiv-2003.