Legal Opinion

Denburg v. Flattau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 23, 1995PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered on or about June 16, 1994, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Summary judgment was properly denied on the ground that issues of fact continue to exist whether the parties intended the alleged oral agreement of 1986 to be an accord and satisfaction, and, if so, its intended scope (see, 82 NY2d 375, 384-385).

The Court of Appeals has specifically outlined the factual issue and in fact said that an agreement to settle a dispute can be enforced even though the forfeiture clause was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Denburg v. Flattau & KlimplNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Rizzi v. SussmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cuevas v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  2. NAB Construction Corp. v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API