Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Mendel BREUER, respondent-appellant, v. Michael FEDER, et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants-respondents, et al., defendant third-party plaintiff; Moses Schnitzler, third-party defendant-respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, (1) the defendants-third-party plaintiffs Michael Feder, Joseph Feder, Feder Automotive Services, Inc., d/b/a Feder's Auto Sales & Service, and MSJS Realty Corp., appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Orange County (McGuirk, J.), dated July 19, 2004, as denied their motion for summary judgment and their separate motion to vacate the note of issue, and granted the separate cross motions of the plaintiff and the third-party defendant for summary judgment, and (2) the plaintiff cross-appeals from so much of the order and judgment as failed to award him statutory interest.
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the plaintiff and the third-party defendant.
The Supreme Court properly determined that the “Letter of Understanding” entered into by the parties was an unenforceable agreement to agree since it omitted essential terms and it contemplated more complete and formal agreements (see Frankel v. Ford Leasing Development Co., 7 A.D.3d 757, 776 N.Y.S.2d 905).
The plaintiff was not entitled to prejudgment statutory interest on his deposit, but only interest actually earned while held in escrow and thereafter deposited with the Orange County Commissioner of Finance.
The parties' remaining contentions are without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 14, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)