From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milad v. Marcisak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 14, 2003
307 A.D.2d 281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-03390

Submitted April 17, 2003.

July 14, 2003.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a contract for the sale of real property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Donoghue, J.), dated March 19, 2002, which granted the defendants' motion to enjoin the sale or transfer of the subject property and directed the parties to comply with a stipulation dated November 7, 2001, by a date certain, and denied, as academic, their cross motion to terminate the "April 1997" lease and the option to purchase granted therein.

Alter Alter, New York, N.Y. (Stanley Alter of counsel), for appellants.

Warren S. Hecht, Forest Hills, N.Y., for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for a determination of the cross motion.

The Supreme Court erred in concluding that the defendants Paul Marcisak and Barbara Marcisak (hereinafter the purchasers) were entitled to an injunction preventing the sale or transfer of the subject property. When a provision that time is of the essence is included in a real estate contract, each party must tender performance on the law day unless the time for performance is extended by mutual agreement ( see Grace v. Nappa, 46 N.Y.2d 560, 565). When "time of the essence" is expressly stated, the parties are obligated to strictly comply with the terms of the contract ( see East Lincoln Realty Ctr. v. Isley, 170 A.D.2d 574, 575).

Here, the purchasers defaulted on their contractual obligations by failing to appear at the closing on the scheduled date of January 15, 2002, pursuant to the stipulation dated November 7, 2001, and the contract of sale ( see Eichenstein v. Glassman, 302 A.D.2d 421; Zelmanovitch v. Ramos, 299 A.D.2d 353; Zahl v. Greenfield, 162 A.D.2d 449).

SANTUCCI, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, McGINITY and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Milad v. Marcisak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 14, 2003
307 A.D.2d 281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Milad v. Marcisak

Case Details

Full title:MONET MILAD, ET AL., appellants, v. PAUL MARCISAK, ET AL., respondents

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

Date published: Jul 14, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
762 N.Y.S.2d 282

Citing Cases

Champion v. Blue Water Advisors

The notice must be clear, distinct and unequivocal and must fix a reasonable time within which to perform (…

William Champion v. Blue Water Advisors, Inc.

Before: Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ. The motion court properly granted…