▶ Video explainer coming soon
The appeals court agreed with the trial court that the defendants were liable for breach of contract. It gave weight to the trial judge, who had heard the witnesses directly. But the court found a problem with the damages. Davis claimed over $57,000 in unpaid water charges. The evidence only proved $2,033.46 of that amount was linked to the defendants' actions, ten days after closing. The rest wasn't clearly tied to their breach. So the court reduced the total judgment from $275,530 down to $220,218.28 and sent the case back for an updated judgment.
Althea Davis bought a newly built three-family home in Brooklyn in 2006. The seller, Built Up Incorporated, promised to finish repairs, get a tax abatement, and pay water charges up to closing. Davis paid $4,000 for the tax abatement. She later sued, saying the sellers and related companies, Melody Development, David Manesh, and John Khani, broke these promises. Two lawsuits were filed and combined into one case. After a trial without a jury, the court ruled for Davis. It ordered the defendants to pay $275,530 for breach of contract, including unpaid water charges. The defendants appealed, challenging both the liability finding and the amount awarded.
The appeals court had to answer two questions. First, did the trial court correctly find the defendants responsible for breaking the contract? Second, was the water charge amount included in the damages actually proven to be the defendants' fault, or did it include costs that built up later, after the defendants no longer had control over the water bill?
This case shows that in New York, courts require clear proof connecting each cost to a specific broken promise. A judgment can be reduced on appeal if some damages aren't backed by solid evidence, even when liability itself is upheld. It highlights how important detailed records are in real estate contract disputes.
Talk to a licensed real estate lawyer in New York.