Case ID: ad2d_206/html/0423-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Wing Shun Tsang, Respondent, v Stuart Brady et al., Appellants.
    [616 NYS2d 198]
   In an action to recover a down payment tendered pursuant to a contract for the sale of real estate, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), entered December 11, 1992, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $7,275.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, CPLR 3212; Berholtz v Georgiou, 184 AD2d 677). The plaintiff demonstrated by competent evidence that he signed a contract conditioned upon his obtaining a mortgage and, through no willful default, his application was denied. The defendants’ unsubstantiated allegations that the plaintiff attempted to sabotage the granting of a mortgage commitment were insufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (see, Ihmels v Kahn, 126 AD2d 701). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.