Cohen v. Kranz

12 N.Y.2d 242, 189 N.E.2d 473 (1963)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The buyer (P) and seller (D) entered a contract for the sale of D's one-family house. The property contained a swimming pool and a fence, which were violative of certain restrictive covenants. Further, the house lacked a certificate of occupancy from the local architectural control committee. Based on these facts, P notified D prior to the closing date that the title was unmarketable, and demanded a return of P's deposit. The trial court held that P had notified D of the defects prior to the closing date, that D had taken no steps to remedy them, and that P was entitled to a return of the deposit. On appeal, the Appellate Division found that P's letter rejecting title failed to specify the defects upon which it was based, and that specific objections were not raised until nearly six weeks after the date set for closing. The Appellate Division further found that the defects complained of would have been curable upon proper notice. P appeals the Appellate Division's reversal of the trial court.