SAVASTA v. DUFFY

We agree with the IAS Court that any breach by defendant of this million-dollar contract by reason of his failure to disclose the $4,400 assessment, which could have been paid in 60 monthly installments, or $73 a month, was not material as a matter of law, and therefore did not justify plaintiffs' refusal to close ( see, Wong v. Weissman, 133 A.D.2d 821; cf., Kraitenberger v. Aloow Realty Corp., 172 A.D.2d 647, lv dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 1072; see also, 430 W. 23rd St. Tenants Corp. v. 23rd Assocs., 155 A.D.2d 237, 239). The court also properly canceled the notice of pendency since shares in a cooperative apartment are personal and not real property ( Sansol Indus. v. 345 E. 56th St. Owners, 159 Misc.2d 822). We have considered plaintiffs' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Nardelli, Tom and Andrias, JJ.