From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore Bowles, Inc. v. Cottrone Dev. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 10, 1987
132 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

July 10, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Galloway, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Special Term correctly denied defendant's motion for summary judgment. The listing agreement entered into by the parties provided that plaintiff was entitled to a sales commission in the event of a sale of the property by anyone during the term of the listing agreement. Therefore, defendant could not have made a sale during this period without becoming liable to plaintiff for a sales commission. Plaintiff has submitted evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact, with respect to the defenses of equitable estoppel and bad faith, which require a trial (Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324). In view of our determination that the listing agreement gave the exclusive right to sell, defendant's contention that plaintiff's claim is barred by the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-701 [a] [1]) is without merit.


Summaries of

Moore Bowles, Inc. v. Cottrone Dev. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 10, 1987
132 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Moore Bowles, Inc. v. Cottrone Dev. Co.

Case Details

Full title:MOORE BOWLES, INC., Respondent, v. COTTRONE DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.…

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

Date published: Jul 10, 1987

Citations

132 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Charles E. Hyde Realty, Ltd. v. Yerganian

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. The Supreme Court correctly determined that the brokerage…