Majority
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered January 10, 1994, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We disagree with the IAS Court that the alleged agreement is too indefinite to be enforced, the "industry standards” upon which the modified commission amount was to be based being a sufficiently definite extrinsic standard (see, Cobble Hill Nursing Home v Henry & Warren Corp., 74 NY2d 475 , 483) and the other missing terms being determinable from the unmodified written bonus plan. We nevertheless affirm on the alternative ground urged by defendants before the IAS Court (see, Matter
Cases cited
- Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc. v. Henry & Warren Corp. 74 NY2d 475 at 483 p. 512
- American Dental Cooperative, Inc. v. Attorney-General 127 AD2d 274 at 279 p. 513
- Namad v. Salomon Inc. 74 NY2d 751 at 752 p. 513
- W.W.W. Associates, Inc. v. Giancontieri 77 NY2d 157 at 162 p. 513