In Yang v. Chin , the parties' contract of sale provided, in pertinent part, as follows:
Due to Seller's potential adverse economic and tax considerations, in order for Purchaser to induce Seller to enter into this contract, Purchaser grants Seller an absolute and unconditional right of cancellation. In the event Seller elects to cancel contract, upon Purchaser's receipt of the contract deposit returned by escrow agent, this contract shall be null and void and both parties release each other from any and all liabilities.
Well, as luck would have it, some three weeks after the contract was signed, Shew-Foo Chin withdrew from the deal (purportedly due to a "title problem") and returned the $50,000 downpayment to the buyer, Ying-Qi Yang.
When Yang later sued to force the building's sale, the New York County Supreme Court rebuffed Chin's attempt to have the case dismissed.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed.
Chin was found to have had an "'absolute and unconditional right of cancellation,'" and since the agreeement's language didn't suffer from any ambiguity or other irregularity, the AD1 was of the opinion that Yang didn't have a viable cause of action or basis for relief against the seller.
In other words, as far as this particular case was concerned, it looks like Yang took it on the Chin.
To download a copy of the Appellate Divisions' decision, please use this link: Yang v. Chin