Wolf v. Wohl

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Wolf v. Wohl

103 Misc. 2d 1044, 431 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1980 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2249

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 19, 1980·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[1045] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order is unanimously reversed, without costs, and complaint dismissed.

A lease is both a contract and a conveyance of an estate or interest in land (1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant [2d ed], §§ 2, 3). Since the lease and occupancy of the apartment are inextricably related to the sale of shares in the co-operative corporation (see Matter of State Tax Comm. v Shor, 43 NY2d 151, 157; Frank v Rubin, 59 Misc 2d 796), a contract to pay compensation for services rendered in negotiating the sale of such shares comes within the purview of section 5-701 of the General Obligations Law and section 442-d of the Real Property Law (see Frank v Rubin, supra; Sebel v Williams, 88 Misc 2d 411). The plaintiff herein was not a licensed real estate broker or a salesperson and the agreement to pay commission was not in writing. Accordingly, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover commissions.

Concur: Pittoni, P. J., Slifkin and O’Gorman, JJ.

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

[1045] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order is unanimously reversed, without costs, and complaint dismissed.

A lease is both a contract and a conveyance of an estate or interest in land (1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant [2d ed], §§ 2, 3). Since the lease and occupancy of the apartment are inextricably related to the sale of shares in the co-operative corporation (see Matter of State Tax Comm. v Shor, 43 NY2d 151, 157; Frank v Rubin, 59 Misc 2d 796), a contract to pay compensation for services rendered in negotiating the sale of such shares comes within the purview of section 5-701 of the General Obligations Law and section 442-d of the Real Property Law (see Frank v Rubin, supra; Sebel v Williams, 88 Misc 2d 411). The plaintiff herein was not a licensed real estate broker or a salesperson and the agreement to pay commission was not in writing. Accordingly, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover commissions.

Concur: Pittoni, P. J., Slifkin and O’Gorman, JJ.

Wolf v. Wohl, 103 Misc. 2d 1044, 431 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1980 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

103 Misc. 2d 1044 (Wolf v. Wohl) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related