Pallota v. Gullo

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Pallota v. Gullo

18 Misc. 2d 381, 193 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3465

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 16, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 18 Misc. 2d 381 (Pallota v. Gullo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pallota v. Gullo, 18 Misc. 2d 381, 193 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence indicates that after showing the house to defendant-appellant and calling her on the telephone on a single occasion, plaintiffs abandoned their efforts to effect a sale. The property was later sold by another broker who was paid his commission. Under the circumstances, plaintiffs failed to make out a case upon any of the theories asserted (Newberry & Co. v. Warnecke & Co., 267 App. Div. 418, affd. 293 N. Y. 698). In any event, the cause of action for conspiracy fell with the dismissal of the cause of action asserted against the seller for commissions, from which no appeal was taken. (Muldoon v. Silvestre, 283 App. Div. 886.)

The judgment should be unanimously reversed on the law and facts, with $30 costs to defendant, Helen Malinowski, and complaint dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

The evidence indicates that after showing the house to defendant-appellant and calling her on the telephone on a single occasion, plaintiffs abandoned their efforts to effect a sale. The property was later sold by another broker who was paid his commission. Under the circumstances, plaintiffs failed to make out a case upon any of the theories asserted (Newberry & Co. v. Warnecke & Co., 267 App. Div. 418, affd. 293 N. Y. 698). In any event, the cause of action for conspiracy fell with the dismissal of the cause of action asserted against the seller for commissions, from which no appeal was taken. (Muldoon v. Silvestre, 283 App. Div. 886.)

The judgment should be unanimously reversed on the law and facts, with $30 costs to defendant, Helen Malinowski, and complaint dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Misc. 2d 381, 193 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pallota-v-gullo-nyappterm-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack