Barnett v. Sussman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiffs, Jacob Barnett and another, from a-judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Queens on the 4tli day of October, 1905, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Queens County Special Term. ■ The action was for specific performance of a contract to sell real estate.
1Opinion of the Court
Gaynor, J.:
The contract between the plaintiffs and the defendant was that the plaintiffs should pay the defendant $320 for four lots of land by paying $32 down and $20 a month thereafter. It was .made Julie 22nd, 1901. It contained a clause.that on default in any payment the seller might 30 days thereafter elect without notice that all the payments become forfeited, to her and belong to her as liquidated damages, and that thereupon the contract should terminate. .
*860The plaintiffs paid $209 in all. The'last payment was of $10 in-September, 1903, ,The. payments were not according to contract, but…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harris v. TroupNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
- Cythe v. La FontainNew York Supreme Court · 1868
- Murray v. Harbor & Suburban Building & Savings Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
3Cited by7 opinions
- Stevinson v. JoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Gray v. PeltonOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Pearson v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Miller v. Modern Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
- Church v. Bourne, New York County Courts1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.