Opinion
February 24, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.).
Since it is clear that the parties' agreement conditioned plaintiff's entitlement to commissions upon defendant's receipt of advertising revenues, and equally clear that, as is here relevant, such revenues were not received, plaintiff's first cause of action seeking commissions was without merit as a matter of law and was properly dismissed by the IAS Court. Similarly without merit and properly dismissed by the IAS Court was plaintiff's second cause of action seeking reimbursement for travel expenditures; the parties' agreement made no provision for such reimbursement and plaintiff has, in any case, conceded that defendant was under no obligation to reimburse him for the expenditures claimed. Finally, plaintiff's third cause of action for unpaid wages was properly dismissed for failure to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211 [a] [7]), and it was a proper exercise of the IAS Court's discretion to deny plaintiff's cross motion to amend his third cause of action. We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Williams and Tom, JJ.