From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sosnow v. Paul

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 1, 1975
36 N.Y.2d 780 (N.Y. 1975)

Opinion

Argued February 21, 1975

Decided April 1, 1975

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, ALEXANDER BERMAN, J.

Irwin M. Taylor, Stuart Newmark and Alan L. Stein for appellants.

William H. Morris and Gerald P. McMorrow for respondents.


MEMORANDUM. Order of the Appellate Division affirmed, with costs, on the majority memorandum at the Appellate Division, with the following additional comment: While, if they were correct, the dissenters at the Appellate Division were properly repelled by the idea that a Statute of Limitations should preclude a cause of action before it ever accrued, that was not the case here. Upon completion of the buildings a cause of action accrued for the harm done, namely, the cost of correction of the defects in the buildings constructed, or, if the defects were not remediable, the difference in value between properly constructed buildings and those that were in fact built (Bellizzi v Huntley Estates, 3 N.Y.2d 112, 115-116; 1 Restatement, Contracts, § 346, subd [1], par [a]; 11 Williston, Contracts [3d ed], § 1363, pp 344-346).

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum; Judge WACHTLER taking no part.

Order affirmed.


Summaries of

Sosnow v. Paul

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 1, 1975
36 N.Y.2d 780 (N.Y. 1975)
Case details for

Sosnow v. Paul

Case Details

Full title:MORRIS SOSNOW et al., Appellants, v. SAMUEL PAUL et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 1, 1975

Citations

36 N.Y.2d 780 (N.Y. 1975)
369 N.Y.S.2d 693
330 N.E.2d 643

Citing Cases

Steiner v. Wenning

We have considered the impact of Paver in deciding Sears, Roebuck Co. v Enco Assoc. Here, as in Sears,…

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Enco Associates, Inc.

As amplified by the bill of particulars, the Special Term concluded that the complaint pleaded an action…