Opinion
Argued February 27, 2001.
March 26, 2001.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated December 17, 1999, as granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Sanford F. Young, P.C., New York, N.Y., and Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian Feffer, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Arthur Fisch and Roy Jacobs of counsel), for appellants (one brief filed).
Clifford Chance Rogers Wells, LLP, New York, N.Y. (David A. Schulz, Sheila O'Shea, and Mark A. Weissman of counsel), for respondent.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, P.J., FRED T. SANTUCCI, SONDRA MILLER, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the term "effective cost of funds" is not ambiguous (B R Children's Overalls Co. v. New York Job Dev. Auth., 257 A.D.2d 368). As a result, the rules governing the construction of ambiguous contracts were not triggered (see, Matter of Wallace v. 600 Partners Co., 86 N.Y.2d 543, 548; Breed v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 46 N.Y.2d 351, 355).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.