Under Real Property Law § 442-d an action to recover commissions is barred "except upon allegation and proof that the person was a duly licensed real estate broker on the date the cause of action accrued" (NFS Services, Inc. v W. 73rd St. Assoc., 102 AD2d 388, 391 [1st Dept 1984], affd. 64 NY2d 919 [1985]). In addition, Real Property Law § 440-a requires that the individual brokers associated with or working for a corporate broker must be licensed (Coldwell Banker Mid Plaza Real Estate Inc. v Guindi, 23 Misc 3d 1132[A] [ Sup Ct 2009]). Here, plaintiff alleges that both Benny Blanco, Inc. and Turboff were duly licensed real estate brokers during the time plaintiff purportedly earned commissions.
Because plaintiffs' quantum meruit claims stem from their belief that they performed services meriting compensation and the existing contracts do not necessarily cover the dispute, plaintiffs have adequately stated claims for recovery in quantum meruit. If New Jersey law were ultimately found to control, plaintiff Terra would be barred from recovering its brokerage commission under, not only the Brokerage Agreement, but also under any equitable theory ( see Weston Funding Corp. v Lafayette Towers, Inc., 550 F.2d 710, 715-716 [2d Cir 1977] (New York and New Jersey statutory law precluding recovery of commission applies to breach of contract and quantum meruit claims); see also Coldwell Banker Mid Plaza Real Estate Inc. v Guindi, 23 Misc 3d 1132A, 2009 Slip Op 51043U at *13 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2009] ("Unlicensed persons cannot evade the licensing requirements by invoking equitable remedies to recover in tort rather than in contract")).