Lawwly

Cohen v. Kranz

Court of Appeals of New York

189 N.E.2d 473 (1963)

Relevant factsFree

Cohen (plaintiff) contracted to buy the Kranzes' (defendants) home, paying a $4,000 deposit, but shortly before the closing date her attorney claimed, without specifics, that title was unmarketable and demanded payment; on the closing date, without tendering payment or demanding good title, Cohen's attorney instead demanded return of the deposit, which the Kranzes refused. Neither side proceeded with closing, and only after suit was filed did Cohen reveal her specific objections — a missing certificate of occupancy for the pool and a fence extending past the property line. The Kranzes, having sold the property to someone else at a lower price, countersued for breach; the trial court ruled for Cohen, and the Appellate Division reversed.

IssueFree

Whether a buyer who declines to close a property purchase because of unspecified impairments to title that turn out to be minor and curable is entitled to a return of her deposit.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Related cases