Actions for specific performance of contracts for the purchase and sale of real property abound.  The plaintiffs allege that they are ready, willing and able to perform.  And the defendants either refuse to close or assert that their performance is excused by the failure of a condition precedent.  Several recent examples follow.

Chun Peter Dong v. First Korean Church of N.Y., 2017 NY Slip Op 05063 (App. Div. 2nd Dept. June 21, 2017)

Supreme Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for specific performance of a contract to sell real property and declared that the contract was not binding and enforceable.

The Appellate Division summarized the facts:

Continue reading

Yellowstone Update

Graubard Mollen Horowitz Pomeranz & Shapiro v. 600 Third Ave. Associates, 93 N.Y.2d 508, 693 N.Y.S.2d 91, 715 N.E.2d 117 (1999)  (“The party requesting a Yellowstone injunction must demonstrate that: ‘(1) it holds a commercial lease; (2) it received from the landlord either a notice of default, a notice to cure, or a threat of termination of the lease; (3) it requested injunctive relief prior to the termination of the lease; and (4) it is prepared and maintains the ability to cure the alleged default by any means short of vacating the premises[.]’”)

Prince Fashions, Inc. v. 60G 542 Broadway Owner, LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op 02918 (App. Div. 1st Dept. April 18, 2017)

The Appellate Division addressed an Order of Supreme Court that denied plaintiff’s motion for a Yellowstone injunction stating that:

Continue reading


People always joke that ‘dog’ spells ‘god’ backwards.  They should consider that it might be the higher power coming down to see just how well they do, what kind of people they are.  The animals are right here, right in front of us.  And how we treat these companions is a test.

                                                                                                            Linda Blair

Over the past several months, our trial level and appellate courts have entertained and decided an unusually-broad panoply of suits and appeals relating to dogs, cats and other household pets.  Issues presented ranged from the rights of chimpanzees to habeas corpus relief; several “vicious propensities” disputes; the duty of care and strict liability for injuries caused by animals; seizure of pets; harboring dogs and cats violation of a lease; and the warrantless search and seizure of a neglected dog. Continue reading