Woods v. Nadel
This text of 90 F. Supp. 962 (Woods v. Nadel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Court is satisfied that the brokerage paid by the sub-lessee did not inure to the benefit of the defendants in this case, and therefore that the rent paid by the sub-lessee was not enhanced so as to violate the statute; the sub-lessee agreed to pay the brokerage, with knowledge that the tenant in possession, who desired to dispose of her lease, was unwilling to pay a commission to the real estate broker who handled the transaction for her, and this fact was known to the sub-lessee when he entered into negotiations with the tenant of the apartment through the broker who advertised the premises for rental.
Judgment for defendants.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 F. Supp. 962, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woods-v-nadel-nyed-1950.