ContractsProf Blog

Editor: D. A. Jeremy Telman
Valparaiso Univ. Law School

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Friday, March 18, 2005

Cases: No special language required for accord & satisfaction

New_york_flag_1 A plaintiff who demanded and accepted a specific amount as due him from a breach had entered into an accord and satisfaction, said the New York Appellate Division, even though the defendants did not tell him they intended such a thing and even though the check made in payment did not reflect it.

The issue in any accord and satisfaction case, said the court, is what the parties intended.  Here, the plaintiff had demanded the precise amount that at the time he thought he was owed.  Defendants paid that full amount. Under these circumstances, both parties should have understood they were working an accord and satisfaction of the dispute.

Horn v. PTJP Partners, LP., No. 5470 et al., 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2069 (1st Dept. March 1, 2005).

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/contractsprof_blog/2005/03/cases_no_specia.html

Recent Cases | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d83543ef8769e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Cases: No special language required for accord & satisfaction: