This was originally published on the SGR Blog.
Mundane business transactions involving relatively small amounts may nevertheless raise a variety of factual and legal issues. And, as a recent case illustrates, what started as a garden variety case arising out of the consignment of a Persian rug to a dealer became a far more complicated dispute with the passage of time.
Jahanshah Josh Nazimayal and Rugs and Kilim Corp. are carpet dealers. Peter Lentz owns a Persian Mahal rug. Pursuant to a consignment agreement dated June 21, 2011, Nazimayal and Kilim acknowledged receiving Lentz’s rug and agreed to try to sell it for a 20% commission.
This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.
In first year “contracts” (in 1966) at NYU Law, Professor Francis J. Putman spent (what seemed like) several weeks on “offer and acceptance” and “meeting of the minds.” Five decades later, our courts still periodically address those threshold issues. A recent case illustrates the point.
In March 2015, William Collins entered into negotiations with Utica Builders, LLC, for the sale of the Collins’ real property located in Brooklyn. On March 6, 2015, Utica submitted a proposal to purchase the property for $590,000, with a deposit of $29,500. Collins then sent Utica an unexecuted proposed contract of sale that included Utica’s proposed price terms and provided that the property would be sold as is. On March 19, 2015, Utica sent Collins a check in the amount of $29,500, as a deposit, and four signed copies of the contract of sale– with handwritten additions stating that Collins represented that the “[p]remises are a legal (2) family dwelling as per the certificate of occupancy.” On March 26, 2015, Collins’ attorney changed the handwritten description of the premises from “(2) family dwelling” to “(1) family dwelling,” and sent two original copies of the fully executed contract of sale back to Utica’s attorney.