Realty Law Digest
Scott E. Mollen, a partner at Herrick, Feinstein, discusses 'Saunders Ventures v. Morrow,' 'Estate of Parisi,' and 'In re Jian Min Lei v. NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development.'
June 12, 2018 at 02:17 PM
3 minute read
Brokerage—Real Estate Broker Entitled to Half Commission Since Efforts Were Critical to Sale
i.e.Broker, Seller and Purchaser each represents and warrants to the other that it has not dealt with any other broker in connection with this sale other than [Seller's broker] and [plaintiff] and Seller shall pay Broker any commission earned pursuant to a separate agreement between Seller and Broker….
The commission payable to the Selling Broker shall be the lessor of the Selling Broker Commission as described in both, or 50 percent of the total commission actually collected by the Exclusive Broker. No commission is due unless and until title passes to a broker procured by the Selling Broker and the commission is collected by the Exclusive Broker.
It was not meant by these cases,…that the broker must of necessity be present and an active participator in the agreement of buyer and seller when the agreement is actually concluded. He must just as effectively produce and create the agreement, though absent when it is completed and taking no part in the arrangement of its final details.
Comment: Saunders Ventures v. Morrow, Sup. Ct., Suffolk Co., Case No. 033638/2011, decided Feb. 20, 2018, Hudson, J.Partition—Surrogate Court—Proceeding Dismissed for Lack of SubjectMatter Jurisdiction—Majority Owners of Real Property Were Not Directly Interested in the Estate's Administration
The Surrogate's Court's subject matter jurisdiction originates in the New York State Constitution which provides the court's power extends “over all actions and proceedings relating to the affairs of decedents, probate of wills, administration of estates and actions and proceedings arising thereunder or pertaining thereto”…. The Surrogate's Court Procedure Act legislatively codifies this grant of jurisdiction and states the Surrogate's Court's has “all the jurisdiction conferred upon it by the Constitution and all other authority and jurisdiction now or hereafter conferred upon the court by any general or special statute or provision of law, including this act”…. Indeed this court's powers are so broad that, “'for the Surrogate's Court to decline jurisdiction, it should be abundantly clear that the matter in controversy in no way affects the affairs of a decedent or the administration of his estate'”…. The Surrogate's Court powers to fulfill its jurisdictional mandate are “full and complete general jurisdiction in law and in equity to administer justice”…. Moreover, so long as the Surrogate's Court has subject matter jurisdiction over a controversy, its powers are equal to that of the Supreme Court…. Based upon this broad definition of this court's subject matter jurisdiction, an action for partition, would, at least conceptually, fall within this court's constitutional and statutory mandate….
In the Matter of the Estate of Parisi, Surrogate's Ct., Queens Co., Case No. 2017-1071/A, decided Feb. 6, 2018, Kelly, J.Landlord-Tenant—Succession—Income Affidavit Is Not Conclusive Evidence
Comment: I n re Jian Min Lei v. New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, App. Div., 1st Dept., Index No. 157409/15, decided Feb. 15, 2018. Sweeny, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kahn, Oing, JJ. All concur. Scott E. Mollen is a partner at Herrick, Feinstein.This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Unraveling of Sean Combs: How Legislation from the #MeToo Movement Brought Diddy Down
When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 2With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 3Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 4Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
- 5Top 10 Developments, Lessons, and Reminders of 2024
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250