From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reisshold Developers, Inc. v. Arthur Walkill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 1982
87 A.D.2d 815 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

April 5, 1982


In an action for a declaratory judgment, defendant Citibank, N.A., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rubin, J.), dated June 10, 1981, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, motion for summary judgment granted, and it is declared that the agreement in question does not provide for a credit against, or reduction of, plaintiff's indebtedness of the mortgage principal. The modification agreement in question is unambiguous and complete. It is susceptible to unequivocal interpretation on its own terms, leaving no questions of fact on the record. The underlying agreements make it clear that the credits of $517 for each of the first 90 sewer connections are credits against the release price and are not credits against the mortgage principal. Summary judgment for Citibank, N.A., is thus appropriate. (See Mallad Constr. Corp. v. County Fed. Sav. Loan Assn., 32 N.Y.2d 285, 291.) Gulotta, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Reisshold Developers, Inc. v. Arthur Walkill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 1982
87 A.D.2d 815 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Reisshold Developers, Inc. v. Arthur Walkill

Case Details

Full title:REISSHOLD DEVELOPERS, INC., Respondent, v. ARTHUR WALKILL CORP.…

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

Date published: Apr 5, 1982

Citations

87 A.D.2d 815 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

MENORAH HOME HOSP. FOR AGED INFIRM v. LAUFER

However, "[i]nterpretation of an unambiguous contract provision is a function for the court, and matters…