Sear-Brown Associates, P.C. v. Blackwatch Development Corp., SEAR-BROWN
| Decision Date | 12 July 1985 |
| Docket Number | SEAR-BROWN |
| Citation | 492 N.Y.S.2d 266,112 A.D.2d 765 |
| Parties | ASSOCIATES, P.C., Respondent, v. BLACKWATCH DEVELOPMENT CORP. and J.R. Mascitti Building Corp., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Sutton, De Leeuw, Clark & Darcy, by Frank Monfredo, Rochester, for appellants.
Harter, Secrest & Emery, by Susan Keefer, Rochester, for respondent.
Before DILLON, P.J., and HANCOCK, DOERR, DENMAN and O'DONNELL, JJ.
It was error to award judgment to plaintiff on its action for breach of contract on the theory of substantial performance. In order to recover for substantial performance, the plaintiff must establish that its failure to perform was inadvertent or unintentional and that the defects were insubstantial (see Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent, 230 N.Y. 239, 129 N.E. 889; American Std. v. Schectman, 80 A.D.2d 318, 439 N.Y.S.2d 529, lv. denied 54 N.Y.2d 604, 443 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 427 N.E.2d 512; Triple M. Roofing Corp. v. Greater Jericho Corp., 43 A.D.2d 594, 349 N.Y.S.2d 771). Plaintiff's failure to perform the remaining items of the contract was intentional and the work which remained to be done was significant. The fact that plaintiff allocated $800 or 13% of the contract price for the remaining work indicates that it was not insubstantial (see, e.g., Hollister v. Mott, 132 N.Y. 18, 29 N.E. 1103; Triple M. Roofing Corp., v. Greater Jericho Corp., supra; Fox v. Davidson, 36 App.Div. 159, 55 N.Y.S. 524).
Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts, with costs, and complaint dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re John's Insulation, Inc.
...not substantial performance), appeal denied, 70 N.Y.2d 828, 518 N.E.2d 2, 523 N.Y.S.2d 490 (1987); Sear-Brown Assocs. v. Blackwatch Dev. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 765, 492 N.Y.S.2d 266 (App.Div.1985) (13% remaining); Fuchs v. Saladino, 133 A.D. 710, 118 N.Y.S. 172 (App.Div.1909) (15% remaining); Fo......
-
Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. v. Everfoam Insulation Sys., Inc.
...B. Wilson Roofing & Painting v. Jobco–E.R. Kelly Assoc., 128 A.D.2d 953, 513 N.Y.S.2d 263 ; Sear–Brown Assoc. v. Blackwatch Dev. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 765, 492 N.Y.S.2d 266 ; Triple M. Roofing Corp. v. Greater Jericho Corp., 43 A.D.2d 594, 349 N.Y.S.2d 771 ), the court nevertheless properly per......
-
SBIW, Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 10 Civ. 7812 (PGG)
...with the contract except for minor and relatively unimportant deviations" (citation omitted)); Sear-Brown Assocs., P.C. v. Blackwatch Dev. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 765, 765 (4th Dept. 1985) ("The fact that plaintiff allocated . . . 13% of the contract price for the remaining work indicates that" i......
-
Novair Mech. Corp. v. Universal Mgmt. & Contracting Corp.
...to perform was inadvertent or unintentional and that the defects were insubstantial" ( Sear-Brown Assoc. v. Blackwatch Dev. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 765, 765, 492 N.Y.S.2d 266; see West Orange Mgt., Inc. v. Alaimo, 57 A.D.3d 530, 868 N.Y.S.2d 292; Jerry B. Wilson Roofing & Painting v Jobco-E. R. K......