From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schechter Assocs. v. Maj. Lea. Baseball

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 10, 1998
256 A.D.2d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 10, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.).


The motion court properly found the subject agency agreement ambiguous, as it "may be parsed in two different, equally logical ways" ( Delaware Otsego Corp. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., 192 A.D.2d 911, 912, lv dismissed 82 N.Y.2d 705). It therefore properly considered the parties' practical construction as objectively manifested by their uniform dealings ( see, Kantor v. Bernstein, 245 A.D.2d 138) and correctly concluded therefrom that the parties' contract, obligating defendant to pay plaintiff licensing agency commissions on business done by defendant with a certain licensee, applied as well where the business upon which the subject commissions were calculated was done by defendant with the licensee's successor corporation. Given the clarity with which defendant by its prelitigation conduct acknowledged the obligation now at issue, defendant's subsequent protestations of inadvertence and error were not sufficient to raise factual issues necessitating a trial.

Concur — Lerner, P. J., Ellerin, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.


Summaries of

Schechter Assocs. v. Maj. Lea. Baseball

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 10, 1998
256 A.D.2d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Schechter Assocs. v. Maj. Lea. Baseball

Case Details

Full title:SCHECHTER ASSOCIATES, INC., Respondent, v. MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYERS…

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

Date published: Dec 10, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 266