From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooper Square Realty, Inc. v. A.R.S. Management, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1992
181 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Summary

holding that because "no objective method or formula was provided for determining" the plaintiff's compensation, which "must be definite" in a service agreement, the alleged contract "was merely an agreement to agree and was unenforceable"

Summary of this case from KJ Roberts & Co. v. MDC Partners Inc.

Opinion

March 19, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.).


Plaintiff commenced this action to recover brokerage fees under an agreement with defendants which provided, inter alia, for the appointment of plaintiff as exclusive rental, and management sales agent for defendant's Charles Street property in Manhattan. The agreement further provided that defendants would pay plaintiff "on any commercial lease or on a sale, a commission to be separately determined." Defendants terminated the agreement and some seven months thereafter sold the premises through the efforts of another broker. Plaintiff had performed no services relating to the sale. Defendants moved to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211, which motion was granted by the court, finding that there was never a brokerage contract because of the absence of an essential term, the rate of compensation.

As price is an essential ingredient of every contract for the rendering of services, an agreement must be definite as to compensation (Ellenberg v Schneider, 109 Misc.2d 1058). Where no fee is stated, courts may not calculate a fee without custom and usage evidence to establish an extrinsic standard which is "'fixed and invariable'" in the industry in question (Hutner v Greene, 734 F.2d 896, 900). As no objective method or formula was provided for determining a commission, the exclusive sales contract was merely an agreement to agree and was unenforceable (Martin Delicatessen v Schumacher, 52 N.Y.2d 105). Nor is the Uniform Commercial Code of assistance to plaintiff herein as it involves transactions in goods, not services (see, Communications Groups v Warner Communications, 138 Misc.2d 80).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Cooper Square Realty, Inc. v. A.R.S. Management, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1992
181 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

holding that because "no objective method or formula was provided for determining" the plaintiff's compensation, which "must be definite" in a service agreement, the alleged contract "was merely an agreement to agree and was unenforceable"

Summary of this case from KJ Roberts & Co. v. MDC Partners Inc.

finding there was no enforceable contract because the parties neither had a "definite" agreement on compensation nor provided an "objective method or formula" for determining compensation

Summary of this case from Venezia v. Luxoticca Retail N. Am. Inc.
Case details for

Cooper Square Realty, Inc. v. A.R.S. Management, Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:COOPER SQUARE REALTY, INC., Appellant, v. A.R.S. MANAGEMENT, LTD., et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 19, 1992

Citations

181 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
581 N.Y.S.2d 50

Citing Cases

ZERE REAL EST. SERV. v. ADA. RE

It was undisputed that any agreement was nonexclusive and that there was no agreed-upon duration of any such…

Venezia v. Luxoticca Retail N. Am. Inc.

More importantly, even if these photographs and purchases constituted "designs" under the alleged contract,…