Opinion
January 9, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Our review of the record reveals that the inconsistent contract provisions create an ambiguity as to the intent of the parties concerning the plaintiffs' obligation to pay monthly interest on the outstanding balance of the purchase price raising material and triable issues of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied summary judgment (see, Mallad Constr. Corp. v County Fed. Sav. Loan Assn., 32 N.Y.2d 285).
We have examined the remaining contentions raised on this appeal and cross appeal and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.