1 No. 171
Marco Srour,
Appellant, v. Dwelling Quest Corp.,
Respondent.
2005 NY Int. 146
November 22, 2005
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Steven M. Nachman, for appellant. Submitted by Frederick Walker, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed,
with costs, and the order of the Appellate Term reinstated. The
certified question should not be answered upon the ground that it
is unnecessary.
Although the common law rule is that "a broker who
produces a person ready and willing to enter into a contract upon
his employer's terms . . . has earned his commissions," the
"parties to a brokerage agreement are free to add whatever
conditions they may wish to their agreement" ( Feinberg Bros.
Agency v Berted Realty Co., , 70 NY2d 828, 830 [1987] [quotation
marks and citation omitted]). Here, the rental agreement
obligated defendant-broker to assist plaintiff in renting a
"suitable apartment" and provided that the broker's commission
was to be paid "at the time of lease signing"; however, the
apartment had become uninhabitable by the time the landlord
signed the lease. Accordingly, defendant-broker did not satisfy
the brokerage agreement's condition, and is not entitled to any
commission.