Case Name: HERMES REYES AND LEONOR REYES, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. HARRY C. EGNER, HOLLY EGNER, AND PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND HARRY C. EGNER AND HOLLY EGNER, DEFENDANTS/THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS, AND COLUMBIA REYES, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT/FOURTH-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, FOURTH-PARTY DEFENDANT
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 2010-04-08
Citations: 201 N.J. 417
Docket Number: 
Parties: HERMES REYES AND LEONOR REYES, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. HARRY C. EGNER, HOLLY EGNER, AND PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND HARRY C. EGNER AND HOLLY EGNER, DEFENDANTS/THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS, AND COLUMBIA REYES, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT/FOURTH-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, FOURTH-PARTY DEFENDANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Reports
Volume: 201
Pages: 417–435

Head Matter:
991 A.2d 216
HERMES REYES AND LEONOR REYES, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. HARRY C. EGNER, HOLLY EGNER, AND PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND HARRY C. EGNER AND HOLLY EGNER, DEFENDANTS/THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS, AND COLUMBIA REYES, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT/FOURTH-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. PRUDENTIAL FOX & ROACH REALTORS, FOURTH-PARTY DEFENDANT.
Argued October 27, 2009
Decided April 8, 2010.
LaVecehia, J., filed concurring opinion in which Rabner, C.J., and Rivera-Soto, J., joined.
Albín, J., filed dissenting opinion in which Long and Wallace, JJ., joined.
John J. Novak argued the cause for appellants (Mr. Novak, attorney; Deborah A Plaia, on the briefs).
Michael T. Kearns argued the cause for respondent Prudential Fox & Roach Realtors (Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst & Doukas, attorneys; Mr. Kearns and Dawn P. Marino, on the briefs).
Barry S. Goodman argued the cause for amicus curiae New Jersey Association of Realtors (Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis, attorneys; Mr. Goodman, Jamie A. Yonks, and Steven B. Gladis, on the brief).
William S. Bloom submitted a letter in lieu of brief on behalf of respondents Harry C. Egner and Holly Egner (Methfessel & Werbel, attorneys).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The members of the Supreme Court being equally divided, the judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed.