Mechta v. Scaretta
New York Supreme Court
52 Misc. 2d 696, 276 N.Y.S.2d 652 (1967)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
John Mechta (plaintiff) and his wife contracted with the Scarettas (defendants) to purchase the Scarettas’ home. Mechta and his wife separated after entering into the purchase contract. Prior to the closing of the transaction, Mechta (but not his wife) sued the Scarettas, seeking to require the Scarettas to return the down payment they received because the Scarettas allegedly did not comply with the contract. The Scarettas moved to dismiss Mechta’s complaint pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 1001 due to Mechta’s wife’s absence from the case. Per the Scarettas, Mechta’s wife was a necessary party to the suit because she had an ownership interest in the down payment. Mechta responded that his wife was not a necessary party because the down payment came solely from his funds, with his wife making no contribution to the down payment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shapiro, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
