Douglas Elliman—Gibbons & Ives, Inc. v. Kellerman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Douglas Elliman—Gibbons & Ives, Inc. v. Kellerman

168 A.D.2d 362, 562 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 168 A.D.2d 362 (Douglas Elliman—Gibbons & Ives, Inc. v. Kellerman) 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

Douglas Elliman—Gibbons & Ives, Inc. v. Kellerman, 168 A.D.2d 362, 562 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 13, 1989, which, after nonjury trial, found in favor of plaintiff against defendant in the amount of $45,000, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the complaint dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a real estate brokerage corporation, seeking to [363]*363recover a commission allegedly owed by defendant, failed to submit proof at trial that it was duly licensed at the time of the transaction as required pursuant to Real Property Law § 442-d. As plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, it is unnecessary to reach the remaining issues raised on appeal. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro, Ellerin and Smith, JJ. [See, — AD2d — (Apr. 16, 1991).]

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 13, 1989, which, after nonjury trial, found in favor of plaintiff against defendant in the amount of $45,000, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the complaint dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a real estate brokerage corporation, seeking to [363]*363recover a commission allegedly owed by defendant, failed to submit proof at trial that it was duly licensed at the time of the transaction as required pursuant to Real Property Law § 442-d. As plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, it is unnecessary to reach the remaining issues raised on appeal. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro, Ellerin and Smith, JJ. [See, — AD2d — (Apr. 16, 1991).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 362, 562 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglas-ellimangibbons-ives-inc-v-kellerman-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack