SSI INVESTORS LTD. v. Korea Tungsten Mining Co., Ltd.
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The purported “bid” submitted by appellants, including as an undifferentiated alternative to the specified figure of $556,000, “One dollar ($1.00) more than the highest bidding price you have received for the above property”, was not definite and certain. It did not specify which alternative was to be taken by the owner as the price offered; there was no determinative modifier, as, for instance, “whichever is the higher”.
Even if it were to be concluded that this deficiency was remedied by…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Boyer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
- Thome v. Alexander & Louisa Calder FoundationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Planning & Design Solutions v. City of Santa FeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- Francesconi v. NutterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Amalfitano v. NBTY, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.