From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Dime Savings Bk. of New York, F.S.B

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1996
228 A.D.2d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

June 3, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the facts, by deleting from the second and third decretal paragraphs thereof the words "six months" and substituting therefor the words "three months"; as so modified the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the respondents.

In 1986 the respondents, Louis and Loredana Perez, obtained a mortgage loan from the appellant, The Dime Savings Bank of New York, F.S.B. (hereinafter Dime Savings), in order to purchase premises located in Port Chester, New York. Subsequent to purchasing the premises, the respondents rented it to various tenants. In 1991 a fire severely damaged the premises, rendering it unrentable. Due to the wrongful conduct of Dime Savings and the defendant LFC Nationwide, Inc., the necessary repairs were never completed, the premises remained unrentable, and the respondents were unable to maintain their mortgage payments.

The court awarded damages to the respondents in the amount of $88,450 for the cost of repairs, and in the amount of $21,463.65 for lost rental income, and deducted therefrom the sum of $10,999 received by the respondents in a settlement with Allstate Insurance Company. In addition, the court directed Dime Savings to credit the respondents with all mortgage-related payments from February 10, 1991, until six months after full payment of the judgment.

Dime Savings contends, inter alia, that the court erred in finding that six months was a reasonable time within which the respondents could make repairs to the premises and in directing Dime Savings to credit the respondents with mortgage-related payments for six months following full payment of the judgment. The evidence only supports a credit from February 10, 1991, until three months after payment of the judgment, and we therefore modify the judgment accordingly.

The remaining contentions of Dime Savings are without merit ( see, Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Perez v. Dime Savings Bk. of New York, F.S.B

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1996
228 A.D.2d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Perez v. Dime Savings Bk. of New York, F.S.B

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS PEREZ et al., Respondents, v. DIME SAVINGS BANK OF NEW YORK, F.S.B.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 3, 1996

Citations

228 A.D.2d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
643 N.Y.S.2d 667