Cutaia v. GVA Williams, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cutaia v. GVA Williams, LLC

62 A.D.3d 533, 879 N.Y.S.2d 414

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 19, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 62 A.D.3d 533 (Cutaia v. GVA Williams, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cutaia v. GVA Williams, LLC, 62 A.D.3d 533, 879 N.Y.S.2d 414 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered September 4, 2008, dismissing the cross claim of defendants-appellants GVA Williams, LLC and Williams Real Estate Co., Inc. against defendants-respondents GI Fartners Fund II, L.E and GI Fartners Side Fund II, L.E seeking a declaration that, inter alia, they are entitled to a brokers commission from respondents, pursuant to an order that granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the cross claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Dismissal of the cross claim was appropriate where the documentary evidence established that appellants’ right to act as exclusive agent in connection with the subletting of the premises or any assignment thereof was not triggered by the transaction in the merger agreement, and thus appellants were not entitled to a commission (see Far Realty Assoc. Inc. v RKO Del. Corp., 34 AD3d 261 [2006]). Furthermore, contrary to appellants’ contention, there was no basis for permitting discovery based on their conjecture as to the possibility that a third party performed brokerage services (see e.g. Turbel v Societe Generole, 276 AD2d 446 [2000]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Nardelli and Freedman, JJ. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 32393(U).]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered September 4, 2008, dismissing the cross claim of defendants-appellants GVA Williams, LLC and Williams Real Estate Co., Inc. against defendants-respondents GI Fartners Fund II, L.E and GI Fartners Side Fund II, L.E seeking a declaration that, inter alia, they are entitled to a brokers commission from respondents, pursuant to an order that granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the cross claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Dismissal of the cross claim was appropriate where the documentary evidence established that appellants’ right to act as exclusive agent in connection with the subletting of the premises or any assignment thereof was not triggered by the transaction in the merger agreement, and thus appellants were not entitled to a commission (see Far Realty Assoc. Inc. v RKO Del. Corp., 34 AD3d 261 [2006]). Furthermore, contrary to appellants’ contention, there was no basis for permitting discovery based on their conjecture as to the possibility that a third party performed brokerage services (see e.g. Turbel v Societe Generole, 276 AD2d 446 [2000]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Nardelli and Freedman, JJ. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 32393(U).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 533, 879 N.Y.S.2d 414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cutaia-v-gva-williams-llc-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack