Levy v. Wilcox Press, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levy v. Wilcox Press, Inc.

268 A.D.2d 235, 700 N.Y.S.2d 693, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 268 A.D.2d 235 (Levy v. Wilcox Press, Inc.) 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

Levy v. Wilcox Press, Inc., 268 A.D.2d 235, 700 N.Y.S.2d 693, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered on or about October 6, 1998, which, in an action to recover finder’s fees, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The oral agreement alleged to entitle plaintiff to commissions for referring business to defendant printing company was properly deemed void by the motion court since it falls within the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-701 [a] [10]) and plaintiff has adduced no sufficient writing (see, Baytree Assocs. v Forster, 240 AD2d 305, lv denied 90 NY2d 810). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Mazzarelli, Wallach, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered on or about October 6, 1998, which, in an action to recover finder’s fees, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The oral agreement alleged to entitle plaintiff to commissions for referring business to defendant printing company was properly deemed void by the motion court since it falls within the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-701 [a] [10]) and plaintiff has adduced no sufficient writing (see, Baytree Assocs. v Forster, 240 AD2d 305, lv denied 90 NY2d 810). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Mazzarelli, Wallach, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 235, 700 N.Y.S.2d 693, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-wilcox-press-inc-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack