Opinion
2014-06-4
FRANZOSO CONTRACTING, INC., respondent, v. Lawrence A. PORCARI, et al., appellants.
Mitchell L. Perry, White Plains, N.Y., for appellants. Katz & Klein, Croton–on–Hudson, N.Y. (Gerald M. Klein of counsel), for respondent.
Mitchell L. Perry, White Plains, N.Y., for appellants. Katz & Klein, Croton–on–Hudson, N.Y. (Gerald M. Klein of counsel), for respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (O.Bellantoni, J.), dated June 7, 2012, which, upon a decision of the same court dated May 10, 2012, made after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $14,469.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
In June 2009, the parties entered into a “roof removal” contract whereby the plaintiff was to remove and replace a roof on the defendants' property located in Yonkers. After the plaintiff allegedly completed the work and sought final payment from the defendants, a dispute arose as to whether it had, in fact, performed all of the work required under the contract. In November 2009, after filing a mechanic's lien, the plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and to foreclose on its mechanic's lien. After a nonjury trial, the defendants submitted a memorandum challenging the Supreme Court's admission of extrinsic evidence to explain an ambiguity in the parties' contract. Thereafter,the Supreme Court issued a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
Contrary to the defendants' contention, the Supreme Court properly admitted extrinsic evidence to explain an ambiguity in the parties' contract ( see Weiss v. Weinreb & Weinreb, 17 A.D.3d 353, 793 N.Y.S.2d 100;Chandi v. Shukla, 308 A.D.2d 427, 764 N.Y.S.2d 142). DILLON, J.P., DICKERSON, COHEN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.