Legal Opinion
Poritzky v. Graff
New York County Courts
Decided April 6, 1979PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Gerard E. Delaney, J.
This is a motion to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211 *1113(subd [a], par 7) on the grounds that it fails to state a cause of action. The "cause” of action which plaintiff alleges sounds in the nature of a suit for broker’s commission upon a real estate transaction. What plaintiff actually proposes is the legal equivalent of "The Godfather Clause”, i.e., defendant is liable for failing to accept an offer he could not refuse.
To put such a proposition in true focus, it is appropriate to examine the alleged basis of such a claim. On February 22, 1978,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sibbald v. . the Bethlehem Iron CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Bereswill v. YablonNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Saum v. Capital Realty Development Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1935
- Harper v. ShmulevitzCity of New York Municipal Court · 1958
- Express Realty Co. v. ZinnNew York District Court · 1963
3Cited by2 opinions
- Poritzky v. GraffAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1980
- Shore Realty, Inc. v. CowgerNorthumberland County Circuit Court · 1989