Legal Opinion

Tamarin v. Fitzpatrick

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided January 29, 1925PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Judgment and order unanimously reversed on the law, with thirty dollars costs to appellants, and judgment directed for the defendants, dismissing the complaint, with appropriate costs in the court below.

Plaintiff failed to prove that he was a licensed broker under sections 440 and 440-a of the Real Property Law (as added, by Laws of 1922, chap. 672). That section applies to a broker who procures the sale of a lease. The transaction to consummate in which the plaintiff was engaged included the transfer of a lease. Although a lease is personal property (Rodack v. New Moon Theatre, 121 Misc.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fifth Avenue Building Co. v. . KernochanNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. Rodack v. New Moon TheatreAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1923

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bierman v. BarthelmeusUnited States District Court · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API