Often parties to contracts want sympathy and their understanding of terms to impact on the interpretation of those terms by a judge when things go south. However, if the contract terms are clear, it doesn’t matter what one party’s understanding may or may not have been. In Moutopoulis v. 2075-2081 Wallace Ave. Owners Corp., 2015 NY Slip Op 25086 (March 17, 2015), the plaintiff/prospective real estate purchaser sought the return of his security deposit based on property liens and defendant/seller’s inability to provide financials. But per the terms of the contract, plaintiff purchased the shares on an “as is” basis; the contract contained no warranty, guarantee or representation on the part of the defendant. Plaintiff’s stated understanding was that the “as is” status in the real estate sale context referred only to the physical condition of the property. Lacking evidence in this regard, the Court held that the contract term was clear and found for the seller: “when parties set down their agreement in a clear, complete document, their writing should as a rule be enforced according to its terms.”
The Law Office of Aaron M. Schlossberg, P.C.
(This writing is for general information purposes only, should not be construed as legal advice and does not establish an attorney-client relationship.)
