Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 New York opinions name it 6 courts 1982–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v. Skinnergreen2 sentences2022"As a general rule, acceptance of a check in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim operates as an [*2]accord and satisfaction discharging the claim" ( Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner , 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984]). 2017“As a general rule, acceptance of a check in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim operates as an accord and satisfaction discharging the claim” (Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr,; Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984]). | 9 | 16 |
Baratier v. Stategreen2 sentences2003For the defense to be estab lished, it must first be shown that there is a disputed unliquidated claim between the parties which they have mutually resolved through a new contract ‘discharging all or part of their obligations under the original contract (6 Corbin, Contracts, § 1276; Restatement, Contracts 2d, § 281)’ (Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 ) “Moreover, acceptance of a check will operate as an accord and satisfaction only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge the cl 2003"Moreover, acceptance of a check will operate as an accord and satisfaction only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge the claim ( Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner , 63 NY2d 590 , 596 , supra )." ( Conboy, McKay, Bachman & Kendall v Armstrong , 110 AD2d 1042, 1043 [4th Dept 1985]; see also , Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner , 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984] ["As a general rule, acceptance of a check in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim operates as an accord and satisfacti | 2 | 4 |
Nassoiy v. . Tomlinsongreen2 sentences2003For the defense to be estab lished, it must first be shown that there is a disputed unliquidated claim between the parties which they have mutually resolved through a new contract ‘discharging all or part of their obligations under the original contract (6 Corbin, Contracts, § 1276; Restatement, Contracts 2d, § 281)’ (Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 ) “Moreover, acceptance of a check will operate as an accord and satisfaction only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge the cl 2003"Moreover, acceptance of a check will operate as an accord and satisfaction only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge the claim ( Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner , 63 NY2d 590 , 596 , supra )." ( Conboy, McKay, Bachman & Kendall v Armstrong , 110 AD2d 1042, 1043 [4th Dept 1985]; see also , Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner , 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984] ["As a general rule, acceptance of a check in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim operates as an accord and satisfacti | 2 | 3 |
Horn Waterproofing Corp. v. Bushwick Iron & Steel Co.green2 sentences2003While an accord and satisfaction arises when a creditor accepts payment of less than the whole amount sought by the creditor in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim (Horn Waterproofing Corp. v Bushwick Iron & Steel Co., 66 NY2d 321, 324-325 [1985]; Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984]; Pothos v Averne Houses, 269 AD2d 377, 378 [2000]), an accord and satisfaction is not created if one of the parties to the agreement lacks full knowledge of the material facts (see Sabbagh v Pantano, 170 AD2d 411 [1991]). 1999It is well settled that acceptance of a check in full satisfaction of a disputed unliquidated claim operates as an accord and satisfaction discharging the claim (see, Horn Waterproofing Corp. v Bushwick Iron & Steel Co., 66 NY2d 321 ; Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590 ). | 1 | 3 |
Hudson v. Yonkers Fruit Co.green2 sentences2015“Such agreements are enforceable, however, only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge a legitimately disputed unliquidated claim” (id. at 596; see Hudson v Yonkers Fruit Co., 258 NY 168, 174 [1932]; Narendra v Thieriot, 41 AD3d 442 [2007]; Grandell Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v Serby, 21 AD3d 346 [2005]). 1982It is further well settled that where a debtor tenders less than full payment of a disputed unliquidated claim, there must be a clear manifestation of intent by the debtor that the payment is in full satisfaction of the disputed claim {Hudson v Yonkers Fruit Co., 258 NY 168, 174 , supra; Manley v Pandick Press, supra: Hirsch v Berger Import & Mfg. | 1 | 2 |
Profex, Inc. v. Town of Fishkillgreen1 sentence2017“The party asserting the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction must establish that there was a disputed or unliquidated claim between the parties which they mutually resolved through a new contract discharging all or part of their obligations under the original contract” (Profex, Inc. v Town of Fishkill, 65 AD3d 678, 678 [2009]). | 1 | 1 |
Pothos v. Arverne Houses, Inc.green1 sentence2003While an accord and satisfaction arises when a creditor accepts payment of less than the whole amount sought by the creditor in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim (Horn Waterproofing Corp. v Bushwick Iron & Steel Co., 66 NY2d 321, 324-325 [1985]; Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984]; Pothos v Averne Houses, 269 AD2d 377, 378 [2000]), an accord and satisfaction is not created if one of the parties to the agreement lacks full knowledge of the material facts (see Sabbagh v Pantano, 170 AD2d 411 [1991]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Eisenthal v. Wittlock
green
1 sentence2022Here, defendant established that there was a disputed claim between the parties, and that, after discussions between plaintiff and defendant, plaintiff had not objected to the check, but, indeed, had deposited the check which, on its face and on the endorsement line, noted that it was in full satisfaction of all monies owed ( see Congregation Chachmei Sefarad v Dickman , 198 AD2d 395 [1993]; Guadagni v Chong, 2 Misc 3d 126[A] , 2003 NY Slip Op 51678[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2003]). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Fadare v. Akingrade
neutral
1 sentence2015“Such agreements are enforceable, however, only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge a legitimately disputed unliquidated claim” (id. at 596; see Hudson v Yonkers Fruit Co., 258 NY 168, 174 [1932]; Narendra v Thieriot, 41 AD3d 442 [2007]; Grandell Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v Serby, 21 AD3d 346 [2005]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Narendra v. Thieriot
green
1 sentence2015“Such agreements are enforceable, however, only when the person receiving the check has been clearly informed that acceptance of the amount offered will settle or discharge a legitimately disputed unliquidated claim” (id. at 596; see Hudson v Yonkers Fruit Co., 258 NY 168, 174 [1932]; Narendra v Thieriot, 41 AD3d 442 [2007]; Grandell Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v Serby, 21 AD3d 346 [2005]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Nationwide Registry & Security, Ltd. v. B&R Consultants, Inc.
green
1 sentence2004To have accord and satisfaction, pursuant to GOL § 15-501, the Appellate Division, First Department held in Nationwide Registry & Sec., Ltd. v B & R Consultants, Inc., 4 AD3d 298 (2004), that there must be an acceptance of payment "in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim, without any reservations of rights." Trans World Grocers, Inc. v Sultana Crackers, Inc., 257 AD2d 616 (2d Dept 1999) instructed, at 617, that "[t]he party asserting the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction must establish that there was a genuine dispute regarding an unliquidated claim between the parties | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Selamaj v. City of New York
green
1 sentence2004To have accord and satisfaction, pursuant to GOL § 15-501, the Appellate Division, First Department held in Nationwide Registry & Sec., Ltd. v B & R Consultants, Inc., 4 AD3d 298 (2004), that there must be an acceptance of payment "in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim, without any reservations of rights." Trans World Grocers, Inc. v Sultana Crackers, Inc., 257 AD2d 616 (2d Dept 1999) instructed, at 617, that "[t]he party asserting the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction must establish that there was a genuine dispute regarding an unliquidated claim between the parties | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Blake v. McKamy
green
1 sentence2003While an accord and satisfaction arises when a creditor accepts payment of less than the whole amount sought by the creditor in full settlement of a disputed unliquidated claim (Horn Waterproofing Corp. v Bushwick Iron & Steel Co., 66 NY2d 321, 324-325 [1985]; Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v Skinner, 63 NY2d 590, 596 [1984]; Pothos v Averne Houses, 269 AD2d 377, 378 [2000]), an accord and satisfaction is not created if one of the parties to the agreement lacks full knowledge of the material facts (see Sabbagh v Pantano, 170 AD2d 411 [1991]). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Mance v. . Hossington
green
1 sentence1997Acceptance of the defendants’ payment of rent undisputedly due for October 1994 therefore did not constitute an aiccord and satisfaction of the plaintiff’s disputed unliquidated claim for arrears from the earlier period (see, Manse v Hossington, supra; Miter Realty Corp. v AT&T Communications, supra). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Miter Realty Corp. v. AT&T Communications, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1997Acceptance of the defendants’ payment of rent undisputedly due for October 1994 therefore did not constitute an aiccord and satisfaction of the plaintiff’s disputed unliquidated claim for arrears from the earlier period (see, Manse v Hossington, supra; Miter Realty Corp. v AT&T Communications, supra). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Ber v. Johnson
green
1 sentence1993Inasmuch as there was no dispute that the plaintiffs were owed the liquidated sum of $10,000 under the terms of the settlement agreement, their acceptance of this sum cannot form the basis for an accord and satisfaction (see, Ber v Johnson, 163 AD2d 817 ; Conboy, McKay, Bachman & Kendall v Armstrong, supra). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Boyle v. American Airlines, Inc.
green
1 sentence1983“It is * * * well settled that where a debtor tenders less than full payment of a disputed unliquidated claim, there must be a clear manifestation of intent by the debtor that the payment is in full satisfaction of the disputed claim” (Boyle v American Airlines, 89 AD2d 667 ). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Hirsch v. S. Berger Import & Manufacturing Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1982Co., 67 AD2d 30, 34 ). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Manley v. Pandick Press, Inc.
green
1 sentence1982It is further well settled that where a debtor tenders less than full payment of a disputed unliquidated claim, there must be a clear manifestation of intent by the debtor that the payment is in full satisfaction of the disputed claim {Hudson v Yonkers Fruit Co., 258 NY 168, 174 , supra; Manley v Pandick Press, supra: Hirsch v Berger Import & Mfg. | 1 | 1982–1982 |