Colliers Intl. NY LLC v City Hall Commons LLC

2024 NY Slip Op 33167(U)

September 10, 2024

Supreme Court, New York County

Docket Number: Index No. 650032/2020

Judge: Debra A. James

Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York

State and local government sources, including the New

York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.

This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official

publication.
650032/2020 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC vs. CITY HALL COMMONS LLC

Motion No. 001

Page 1 of 5

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 

12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 23, 29

were read on this motion to/for DISMISS .

ORDER

Upon the foregoing documents, it is 

ORDERED that the motion of the defendant City Hall Commons,

LLC, to dismiss is denied, and it is further;

ORDERED that the cross motion of plaintiff Collier

International NY LLC, for summary judgment on the complaint herein 

is granted and the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment 

in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of 

$206,924.20, together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum 

from September 17, 2019, until the date of the decision and order 

on this motion, and thereafter at the statutory rate, as calculated 

by the Clerk, together with costs and disbursements to be taxed by 

the Clerk upon submission of an appropriate bill of costs.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

NEW YORK COUNTY

PRESENT: HON. DEBRA A. JAMES PART 59

Justice 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------X INDEX NO. 650032/2020

 MOTION DATE 02/27/2020

 MOTION SEQ. NO. 001

DECISION + ORDER ON 

MOTION

COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC,

 Plaintiff, 

- v -

CITY HALL COMMONS LLC,

 Defendant. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

INDEX NO. 650032/2020

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2024

1 of 5 [* 1]
650032/2020 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC vs. CITY HALL COMMONS LLC

Motion No. 001

Page 2 of 5

DECISION

In this action, plaintiff Colliers International NY LLC

(“Colliers”) seeks the payment of a brokerage commission arising

out of the renewal of a lease between the defendant, landlord City

Hall Commons LLC (“CHC”) and non-party JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. 

(“Chase”), tenant, for premises located at 253 Broadway, New York, 

New York. 

Chase retained Colliers in connection with the lease renewal 

and participated in the negotiations. (See e-mail message dated

May 28, 2019 from plaintiff to defendant, with cc: Chase, and

letter dated May 31, 2019 from plaintiff to defendant [NYSCEF

Document Numbers 12 and 13). 

On September 17, 2019, Chase and CHC subsequently agreed to 

the terms of the lease renewal and both acknowledged by letteragreement (the “Renewal Notice”) that Colliers was the sole broker 

involved in the transaction, and that CHC would “pay the fees due 

to [Colliers] relating to this Renewal Notice pursuant to a 

separate agreement.” (NYSCEF Document Number 014, p. 1). In fact,

in support of its dismissal motion, defendant attaches a copy of

the Renewal Notice, which includes a copy of the Commission

Calculation Worksheet. (See NYSCEF Document Number 007, p. 4).

CHC argues that Colliers is not owed any fees because the 

Renewal Notice refers to a separate brokerage agreement, which was 

never executed by the parties. It is undisputed that Colliers 

INDEX NO. 650032/2020

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2024

2 of 5 [* 2]
650032/2020 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC vs. CITY HALL COMMONS LLC

Motion No. 001

Page 3 of 5

sent CHC a brokerage agreement after the renewal was completed, 

and that CHC did not execute such brokerage agreement. (NYSCEF

Document Number 15).

CHC further argues that the issue whether Colliers is entitled

to commissions raises a triable issue that precludes summary 

judgment, as Collier was more a hinderance than helpful during the

lease renewal negotiations.

The clear representation of CHC to pay Collier’s commissions,

as per the Renewal Notice, and documentary evidence of Collier’s 

participation in the lease renewal negotiations entitles Colliers 

to summary judgment, as a matter of law. See Newmark & Co. Real 

Estate Inc. v 2615 E. 17 St. Realty LLC, 80 AD3d 476 (1st Dept 

2011).

Newmark involved a lease that provided “that plaintiff was

the exclusive broker for the transaction and that defendant 

[landlord] would pay its commission,” id, at p 477. The Newmark

court found that the failure of the parties to execute a brokerage 

agreement was not an impediment to enforceability because of the 

parties’ communications establishing that: (1) the broker 

participated in the lease negotiations, (2) the commissions had 

been discussed, (3) the landlord revised the brokerage agreement,

and (4) the landlord never rejected the terms of the unsigned

brokerage agreement. Therefore, the Newark court held that such

INDEX NO. 650032/2020

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2024

3 of 5 [* 3]
650032/2020 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC vs. CITY HALL COMMONS LLC

Motion No. 001

Page 4 of 5

evidence established a “meeting of the minds” as to the 

commissions. See Id. at pp. 477-478.

Here, it is undisputed that Colliers participated in the 

transaction (NYSCEF Document Numbers 012 and 013), and by the

Renewal Notice, CHC expressly agreed to pay Colliers commissions

earned. The failure of the parties to execute a subsequent

brokerage agreement does not relieve CHC of its obligation to pay 

the commissions, as a matter of law. Newmark, id. See also Joseph 

P. Day Realty Corp. v Chera, 308 AD2d 148, 152 (1st Dept 2003):

Where a contract of sale or lease agreement admits the 

broker's performance of services and includes an express 

promise by the seller to pay the broker's commission, 

the broker is entitled to summary judgment on its claim 

for a commission as a third-party beneficiary of the 

contract or lease.

and Helmsley-Spear, Inc v New York Blood Center, Inc., 257 AD2d

64, 67 (1st Dept 2003).

The record is devoid of any objection by CHC to the 

commissions, which were set forth in the Commission Calculation

Worksheet attached to the executed Renewal Notice (NYSCEF Document

Number 007).

Furthermore, CHC’s allegations that Colliers is not entitled 

to commissions because it was a hinderance during the negotiations 

fail to raise a triable issue of fact that would defeat summary 

judgment, as same is merely an effort to “contradict a contractual

admission clear from the instrument itself.” See Helmsley-Spear, 

INDEX NO. 650032/2020

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2024

4 of 5 [* 4]
650032/2020 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL NY LLC vs. CITY HALL COMMONS LLC

Motion No. 001

Page 5 of 5

Inc., 257 AD2d at 68. The other cases cited by CHC are inapposite

and unavailing. 

Colliers is entitled to receive the commissions set forth in 

the Renewal Notice. Colliers is entitled to pre-judgment interest

on such commissions at the statutory rate from the date that the

Lease Renewal was signed. See Lee & Assoc. NYC LLC v 1998 Alexander 

Karten Annuity Tr., 117 AD3d 514, 515 (1st Dept 2014).

9/10/2024

DATE DEBRA A. JAMES, J.S.C.

CHECK ONE: X CASE DISPOSED NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

GRANTED DENIED X GRANTED IN PART OTHER

APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER

CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT REFERENCE

INDEX NO. 650032/2020

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2024

5 of 5 [* 5]