Case Name: David Falk et al., Respondents, v. Meyer F. Goodman, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1959-03-16
Citations: 7 A.D.2d 1014
Docket Number: 
Parties: David Falk et al., Respondents, v. Meyer F. Goodman, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 1014–1014

Head Matter:
David Falk et al., Respondents, v. Meyer F. Goodman, Appellant.

Opinion:
Action by the vendee named in a contract for the purchase and sale of real property to recover money deposited upon the execution thereof on the ground that he was unable to obtain a mortgage loan as provided in the contract. The action is against a third-party depositary who held the money under an escrow agreement. The appeal is from an order granting a motion for summary judgment striking out the answer, and from the judgment entered thereon. Order and judgment affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse the order, to deny the motion and to vacate the judgment, with the following memorandum: The question whether respondent made a bona fide effort to procure the mortgage, which he now claims he was unable to obtain (cf. Wigand v. Bachmannn-Bechtel Brewing Co., 222 N. Y. 272, 277), should not be summarily decided on a motion pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice (cf. Suslensky v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 180 Misc. 624, 626, affd. 267 App. Div. 812; Newman v. Newark Fire Ins. Co., 281 App. Div. 852; Rosenthal v. Horlick, 7 A D 2d 924). [14 Misc 2d 964.]