Avildsen v. Prystay
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Wallach, J.
We affirm the order appealed from essentially for the reasons stated by Justice Fingerhood. However the issue addressed by the dissent — the alleged unconscionability of the bargain (not discussed by the motion court and upon which the dissenters would reverse and remand for a further hearing) — requires a response.
The judicial power to annul a contractual obligation because of its unconscionability was known at common law (see, Matter of Friedman, 64 AD2d 70, 84) and it has found statutory expression in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC 2-302). A pivotal finding…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re Estate of FriedmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Super Glue Corp. v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Jones v. Star Credit Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1969
- Bacon v. BaconNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Fischer v. General Electric HotpointSuffolk County District Court · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Brower v. Gateway 2000, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Elizabeth W. Williams v. Benjamin v. LambertCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- CLARA C. v. William L.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Lewis v. Hertz Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. CoeDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.