From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Badame v. Bock Enterprises, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 5, 1993
190 A.D.2d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

February 5, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Fallon, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Balio, Davis and Doerr, JJ.


Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred by limiting defendant's damages to 10% of the contract price. It is well settled that a vendor is entitled to retain the down payment of the defaulting purchaser, even if the down payment exceeds the vendor's actual damages (see, Maxton Bldrs. v Lo Galbo, 68 N.Y.2d 373; Almima Partners v Gherardi, 177 A.D.2d 611; Alirkan v Garcia, 162 A.D.2d 571; Rho v Morningside In Purchase Assocs., 150 A.D.2d 355; Dmochowski v Rosati, 96 A.D.2d 718). We have examined the arguments raised by plaintiffs on their cross appeal and find them to be either unpreserved or without merit.


Summaries of

Badame v. Bock Enterprises, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 5, 1993
190 A.D.2d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Badame v. Bock Enterprises, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:PHILIP E. BADAME et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. BOCK ENTERPRISES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Feb 5, 1993

Citations

190 A.D.2d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
593 N.Y.S.2d 384

Citing Cases

28TH Highline Assocs., L.L.C. v. Roache

) Throughout New York State, courts will deny a down payment refund when the purchaser has defaulted,…