Case ID: misc2d_103/html/1044-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lee Wolf, Respondent, v Bernice Wohl, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
    June 19, 1980
    APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Ferzinger Wohl Finkelstein & Rothman (Ronald G. Wohl of counsel), for appellant. George Fidel and Leslie W. Rubin for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order is unanimously reversed, without costs, and complaint dismissed.

A lease is both a contract and a conveyance of an estate or interest in land (1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant [2d ed], §§ 2, 3). Since the lease and occupancy of the apartment are inextricably related to the sale of shares in the co-operative corporation (see Matter of State Tax Comm. v Shor, 43 NY2d 151, 157; Frank v Rubin, 59 Misc 2d 796), a contract to pay compensation for services rendered in negotiating the sale of such shares comes within the purview of section 5-701 of the General Obligations Law and section 442-d of the Real Property Law (see Frank v Rubin, supra; Sebel v Williams, 88 Misc 2d 411). The plaintiff herein was not a licensed real estate broker or a salesperson and the agreement to pay commission was not in writing. Accordingly, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover commissions.

Concur: Pittoni, P. J., Slifkin and O’Gorman, JJ.