Narrative Opinion Summary
In the case concerning a breach of contract, defendant Hayt, Hayt, Landau appeals a judgment from the Supreme Court in Nassau County, which denied their request for summary judgment to dismiss the first cause of action in the plaintiff's complaint. The court affirmed the judgment, stating that there is a factual issue regarding whether the plaintiff, a real estate brokerage, earned a commission as the procuring cause of the defendant's renegotiated lease. The court referenced relevant case law to support the existence of this factual dispute. However, the appellate court disagreed with the lower court's determination that the "protect and preserve" provision in the brokerage agreement was ambiguous. The appellate court clarified that this provision explicitly requires the defendant to protect the brokerage's right to recover any earned commission from the property owner. The judgment was affirmed with costs, with all judges concurring.
Legal Issues Addressed
Breach of Contract and Summary Judgmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court addressed the denial of summary judgment in a breach of contract case, affirming the lower court's decision due to the existence of a factual issue regarding commission entitlement.
Reasoning: The court affirmed the judgment, stating that there is a factual issue regarding whether the plaintiff, a real estate brokerage, earned a commission as the procuring cause of the defendant's renegotiated lease.
Interpretation of Brokerage Agreement Provisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court provided clarity on the 'protect and preserve' provision in the brokerage agreement, explicitly stating its requirement for the defendant to safeguard the brokerage's commission rights.
Reasoning: The appellate court clarified that this provision explicitly requires the defendant to protect the brokerage's right to recover any earned commission from the property owner.