Legal Opinion
Haskins v. Loeb Rhoades & Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 28, 1981PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*525OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff’s claim that she is entitled to recover a fee for her assistance in the negotiation of a business opportunity is barred by the express terms of section 5-701 (subd a, par 10) of the General Obligations Law. That statute requires that any claim for a so-called “finder’s fee” be based upon a writing duly subscribed. Inasmuch as plaintiff is unable to prove subscription, she is statutorily precluded from recovery as a “finder” upon any express or implied agreement to pay her for her services as such.
N…
3Cases cited1 opinion
- Dura v. Walker, Hart & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
4Cited by12 opinions
- Ramirez v. GoldbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Sven Salen AB v. Jacq. Pierot, Jr., & Sons, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1983
- Baytree Associates, Inc. v. ForsterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Train v. Ardshiel Associates, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1986
- Richman v. Federated Adjustment Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.