Opinion
October 2, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Leone, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The contract for sale entered into by the parties contained a mortgage contingency clause whereby the contract would be deemed canceled if the purchaser failed to secure a firm mortgage commitment within the specific time period. Since the plaintiff purchaser failed to obtain a mortgage commitment within the period specified, the defendant sellers had the authority to cancel the contract and return the purchaser's down payment (see, Grossman v Perlman, 132 A.D.2d 522).
We have examined the plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.