2814 MORRIS LLC v. ORTEGA (2025)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kim Adair Wilson, J.), entered on or about January 15, 2025, which denied plaintiff buyer's motion for summary judgment on its first cause of action for specific performance of its contract with defendant seller for the sale of certain real property, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

“The elements of a cause of action for specific performance of a contract are that the plaintiff substantially performed its contractual obligations and was willing and able to perform its remaining obligations, that defendant was able to convey the property, and that there was no adequate remedy at law” (EMF Gen. Contr. Corp. v. Bisbee, 6 A.D.3d 45, 51, 774 N.Y.S.2d 39 [1st Dept. 2004], lv dismissed 3 N.Y.3d 656, 782 N.Y.S.2d 695, 816 N.E.2d 568 [2004], lv denied 3 N.Y.3d 607, 785 N.Y.S.2d 25, 818 N.E.2d 667 [2004]).  Here, triable issues of fact exist as to which party is truly at fault for the conceded delays in closing on the 2017 contract.  Moreover, the protracted nature of this litigation raises dueling claims of severe prejudice that would result from a grant or denial of specific performance, especially when the market value of the property allegedly increased during the ensuing years (see Bisbee, 6 A.D.3d at 53, 774 N.Y.S.2d 39).  Thus, the motion court properly denied plaintiff partial summary judgment on its first cause of action.