Meyer v. Cessna Realty Associates — 227 A.D.2d 929

Majority

p. 929

Daniel B. Meyer, Respondent, v Cessna Realty Associates et al., Defendants, and Richard J. Gillani, Appellant.

[643 NYS2d 446]

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly determined that the telephonic communication of the Receiver informing plaintiff that he accepted plaintiff’s written offer to purchase real property resulted in a binding contract for the purchase of that property (see, Tymon v Linoki, 16 NY2d 293 , 298-299, rearg denied 17 NY2d 612 ; Birch v McNall, 19 AD2d 850 ). The court, therefore, properly granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, directing specific performance of that contract (see, Matter of Denison, 114 NY 621 , 622). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Elliott, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Wesley, Callahan, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cases cited

Tymon v. Linoki 16 NY2d 293 N.Y. 1965-12-30 at 298-299 p. 929
In re Denison 114 NY 621 N.Y. 1889-04-16 at 622 p. 929