Mehlman v. 592-600 Union Avenue Corp.

**What happened:** This case involved a real estate dispute between Mehlman (the buyer) and 592-600 Union Avenue Corp. (the seller) over a property purchase. When problems arose with the property's title, the seller offered two options allowed under their contract: either cancel the deal entirely or accept the property with its title issues plus receive a credit to offset the problems. Mehlman rejected both options and instead demanded that money be held in escrow (a neutral third party account) until the title issues were resolved. **What the court decided:** The appeals court ruled in favor of the seller. The court found that the seller had properly followed the contract terms by offering the two remedy options. Since Mehlman refused these contractual options and made unauthorized demands for escrow arrangements, Mehlman was found to have breached the contract. **Why this matters for workers:** While this case involved real estate rather than employment, it demonstrates an important principle: when contracts specify particular remedies or procedures, parties must follow those terms rather than creating their own solutions. For workers, this highlights the importance of carefully reviewing employment contracts and understanding what options are available when workplace disputes arise.