Opinion
698, 699
April 3, 2003.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered February 26, 2002, which denied plaintiff's motion to strike defendant's answer and granted defendants' cross motion to dismiss the amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about February 14, 2002, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.
Pro Se, for plaintiff-appellant.
Rachel L. Warren, for defendant-respondent.
Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Lerner, Friedman, Gonzalez, JJ.
The complaint was properly dismissed as barred by the statute of frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-701[a] [10]) and collateral estoppel (see Ryan v. New York Tele. Co., 62 N.Y.2d 494, 500-501). Although the sale at issue was excluded from Appellate Term's determination in a prior action instituted by plaintiff to recover commissions from this and other sales on the ground that it was not yet ripe, all of the claims were based on plaintiff's purported oral agreement with defendant which was found by Appellate Term as well as this Court (Ghaffari v. Rima Investors Corp., 266 A.D.2d 111, lv dismissed 95 N.Y.2d 778), to be unenforceable under the statute of frauds.
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.