Muzak Corporation v. Trattner

Full title: MUZAK CORPORATION, Respondent-Appellant, v. GEORGE G. TRATTNER…

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1960

28 Misc. 2d 504 (N.Y. App. Term 1960)

208 N.Y.S.2d 139

Opinion

December 1, 1960

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, EUGENE M. McCARTHY, J.

Sidney Schutz and Edward J. McCullen for appellant.

Jacob F. Gottesman for respondent.

Per Curiam.

The contract provided for liquidated damages in the event defendant cancelled the agreement at the end of any yearly period. The provision for liquidated damages did not constitute a penalty. Its effect is to compensate plaintiff for permitting defendant to terminate his contractual obligations ( McCready v. Lindenborn, 172 N.Y. 400; Norris v. McMechen, 135 Misc. 361; Silver Dresses, v. Parker, 73 N.Y.S.2d 704).

The judgment should be modified by increasing the recovery to $430.83, with interest and costs, and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs to plaintiff.

Concur — HECHT, J.P., STEUER and TILZER, JJ.

Judgment modified, etc.