From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Seligman v. Exquisite Form Industries, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 23, 1969
33 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

October 23, 1969


Order entered February 28, 1969, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion to dismiss is denied, with $50 costs and disbursements. The statutory requirement of a writing in the case of contracts to pay compensation for the rendition of services as a finder in connection with the sale of a business opportunity (General Obligations Law, § 5-701, subd. 10) has been held not to apply to an attorney at law, as the statute so precisely declares; and this has been so concluded whether or not an attorney-client relationship existed between the parties. ( Harris v. Sobel, 31 A.D.2d 529, Rever v. Kayser-Roth Corp., 29 A.D.2d 920.)

Concur — Stevens, P.J., Capozzoli, McGivern, Nunez and Steuer, JJ.


Summaries of

Seligman v. Exquisite Form Industries, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 23, 1969
33 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

Seligman v. Exquisite Form Industries, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BERNARD L. SELIGMAN, Appellant, v. EXQUISITE FORM INDUSTRIES, INC., et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 23, 1969

Citations

33 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Citing Cases

Lehman v. Dow Jones Co., Inc.

Lehman suggests that his alleged oral agreement with Dow Jones is properly seen as one for compensation for…

Hutner v. Greene

The New York courts have uniformly held that an attorney means just that — someone licensed to practice law…