Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001

Strauss v. Fleet Mortgage Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 30, 2001

282 A.D.2d 736; 724 N.Y.S.2d 356; 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4200

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Catalogne v. Class Action Recovery, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2026)
Matter of Hersh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Matter of Zelouf (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
Bent v. St. John's Univ., N.Y. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
Kieper v. The Fusco Group Partners Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Bennett v. Atomic Products Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Gersten-Hillman Agency, Inc. v. Heyman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
United Magazine Co. v. Murdoch Magazines Distribution, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 2001)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from, so much of an order of the. Supreme Court,- Nassau County (Phelan, J.), dated January 3, 2000, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action to recover damages for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and in quantum meruit.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract. An agreement to pay an at-will employee commissions earned during the period of his or her employment is capable of performance within one year and does not violate the Statute of Frauds (see, Cron v Hargro Fabrics, 91 NY2d 362, 370; Caruso v Malang, 250 AD2d 800; Gold v Benefit Plan Adm’rs, 233 AD2d 421; Apostolos v R. D. T. Brokerage, 159 AD2d 62). Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, however, the commissions he seeks to recover were not earned during the time of his employment. Thus, an agreement to pay those commissions to the plaintiff was not capable of performance within a year and had to be in writing pursuant to the Statute of Frauds (cf., Cron v Hargro Fabrics, supra; Gold v Benefit Plan Adm’rs, supra; Apostolos v R. D. T. Brokerage, supra).

*737Similarly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the causes of action to recover damages in quantum meruit and for unjust enrichment, as the plaintiff may not assert these causes of action to circumvent the Statute of Frauds (see, American European Art Assocs. v Trend Galleries, 227 AD2d 170; Bauman Assocs. v H & M Intl. Transp., 171 AD2d 479, 484; Tallini v Business Air, 148 AD2d 828). Bracken, P. J., Florio, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.