On June 2, 2022, the First Department issued a decision in LHWS LLC v. S.L. Green Realty Corp., 2022 NY Slip Op. 03574, holding that a broker had adequately alleged its entitlement to a commission, explaining:
A real estate broker claiming entitlement to an earned commission must allege that the broker was the procuring cause of the transaction, meaning that there must be a direct and proximate link, as distinguished from one that is indirect and remote, between the introduction by the broker and the consummation of the transaction. While meeting the procuring cause standard requires something beyond a broker’s mere creation of an amicable atmosphere or an amicable frame of mind that might have led to the ultimate transaction, the broker need not control the transaction, and the broker need not negotiate the transaction’s final terms or be present at the closing. The requirement to plead facts showing that the plaintiff was the procuring cause applies equally to causes of action sounding in breach of contract and quasicontract, such as claims for quantum meruit and unjust enrichment.
On this pre-answer motion to dismiss, the allegations of the complaint, i.e., that plaintiff was sought out and engaged by defendant based on its relationship with the ultimate purchaser, that plaintiff first formulated and proposed the concept of combining the 710 Madison and 712 Madison transactions, that defendant’s senior vice president hand delivered to plaintiff a conceptual term sheet that closely followed plaintiff’s transaction formulations, and that plaintiff’s efforts in facilitating and coordinating negotiations between defendant and the ultimate purchaser resulted in the 710 and 712 Madison transactions, were sufficient to raise the question of whether plaintiff was the procuring cause of the transactions at issue. Thus, defendant’s motion to dismiss the first, second, and third causes of action was correctly denied.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted) (emphasis added).