Search for: "Silva v. Musso"
Results 1 - 5
of 5
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jul 2010, 3:34 am
While the DeCaro defendants contend that a rescission defense based on unilateral mistake would not have been successful in the underlying action for specific performance, specific performance may be denied based on unilateral mistake [*4]where the other party must have been aware of the mistake (see Da Silva v Musso, 53 NY2d 543, 548; Sheridan Drive-In v State of New York, 16 AD2d 400, 405; Harper, Inc. v City of Newburgh, 159 App Div 695, 696-697). [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 3:03 am
While the DeCaro defendants contend that a rescission defense based on unilateral mistake would not have been successful in the underlying action for specific performance, specific performance may be denied based on unilateral mistake [*4]where the other party must have been aware of the mistake (see Da Silva v Musso, 53 NY2d 543, 548; Sheridan Drive-In v State of New York, 16 AD2d 400, 405; Harper, Inc. v City of Newburgh, 159 App Div 695, 696-697). [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
" Citing Da Silva v Musso, 53 NY2d 543, the court said that a stipulation may not be invalidated on the basis of unilateral mistake where the mistake arose out of a party's failure to ascertain facts that were available at the time that it entered into the stipulation. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:43 am
Comparing this case to the facts in Kohl v. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:43 am
Comparing this case to the facts in Kohl v. [read post]
