Diodato v. Eastchester Development Corp.
| Decision Date | 20 May 1985 |
| Citation | 489 N.Y.S.2d 293,111 A.D.2d 303 |
| Parties | Frank DIODATO, et al., Respondents, v. EASTCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Goodhue Banks Arons & Pickett, Mount Kisco (John L. Arons, Mount Kisco, of counsel), for appellants.
John C. Wirth, Jr., White Plains (Maria Joy Frank, White Plains, of counsel), for respondents.
Before TITONE, J.P., and BRACKEN, RUBIN and LAWRENCE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud in the inducement to enter into a contract, to recover damages for breach of that contract, and for specific performance thereof, defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 16, 1983, as denied that branch of their motion which was to dismiss the plaintiffs' cause of action to recover damages for fraud in the inducement.
Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiffs' allegations that defendants falsely promised to equip their new residence with an elevator at no extra charge, and that this misrepresentation was designed to and did in fact induce plaintiffs to sign a contract of sale, were sufficient to state a cause of action to recover damages for fraud in the inducement. We reject defendants' contention that the fraud action is barred by the following clause which appeared in the contract of sale:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Sanchez Espada
...a contract is ambiguous when its terms are reasonably susceptible to two or more interpretations. Diodato v. Eastchester Development Corp., 111 A.D.2d 303, 489 N.Y.S.2d 293, 294 (2d Dept.1985). See also PaineWebber, Inc. v. Elahi, 87 F.3d at 600; In re Kam Kuo Seafood Corp., 76 B.R. 297 (Ba......
-
H. Sand & Co., Inc. v. Airtemp Corp.
...v. Sassower, 66 N.Y.2d 991, 993, 489 N.E.2d 1283, 1284, 499 N.Y.S.2d 381, 382 (1985). See also Diodato v. Eastchester Dev. Corp., 111 A.D.2d 303, 304-305, 489 N.Y.S.2d 293, 294 (2d Dept. 1985). In light of the fact that we find the inspection clause prepared by plaintiff ambiguous, we do no......
-
In re Lady Madonna Industries, Inc.
...An ambiguous claim is one that is susceptible to two reasonable interpretations. See Diodato v. Eastchester Development Corp., 111 A.D.2d 303, 304, 489 N.Y.S.2d 293, 294 (2d Dep't 1985). Where the court finds as a matter of law that the language is unambiguous, extrinsic evidence is not adm......
-
In re Kam Kuo Seafood Corp., Bankruptcy No. 83 B 11836
...(1977). An ambiguous clause is one that is susceptible to two reasonable interpretations. Diodato v. Eastchester Development Corporation, 111 A.D.2d 303, 304, 489 N.Y.S.2d 293, 294 (2d Dep't 1985). Where the court finds as a matter of law that the language is unambiguous, extrinsic evidence......