Summary
In Quantum Realty, supra, the court concluded that the termination of plaintiff's services had been in bad faith, thus entitling plaintiff to its commission.
Summary of this case from Rosenhaus Real Estate, LLC v. S.A.C. Capital Mgmt., Inc.Opinion
April 18, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.).
The decision of the trial court after a nonjury trial finding that defendants-appellants-buyers alone were liable for the real estate brokerage commission in the amount of $600,000, which rested in large measure on issues relating to the credibility of the witnesses, could be reached under a fair interpretation of the evidence and should not be disturbed on appeal (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 N.Y.2d 490, 495, affg 179 A.D.2d 29, 31). Sufficient evidence was presented to establish the continuing connection between plaintiff's initial efforts and the eventual sale of the premises (see, Simon v Electrospace Corp., 28 N.Y.2d 136, 142), and the limited interruption in the sequence of events did not diminish plaintiff's participation in the procurement of the eventual conclusion of the deal. The record supported the conclusion that defendants-appellants' termination of plaintiff's services was in bad faith, thus entitling plaintiff to its commission (see, O'Connell v Rao, 70 A.D.2d 982).
As buyer and seller had negotiated the agreement calling for the buyer to pay all brokerage commissions, the court properly found no liability on the part of Gindoff. Further, plaintiff was not obligated to accept the reduced amount of the commission since the reduction was conditioned upon an expeditious closing, which did not occur.
We have considered defendants-appellants' other claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.