Ordered that the supplemental judgment entered December 20, 2007, and the order entered May 2, 2008, are affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.
The defendant seller was not entitled to cancel the subject contract for the sale of real property. Where, as here, a seller sabotages efforts to close the deal, remedy limitation clauses in the contract of sale do not bar a buyer from obtaining specific performance (see e.g. Naso v Haque,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
