Majority
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered October 18, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Given the seven-year course of dealing between the parties, in which plaintiff received regular statements about his commissions, and the always adhered-to practice of paying the commissions only if and when customers paid on the contracts plaintiff procured, plaintiff earned his commissions upon payment by the customer (see Pachter v Bernard Hodes Group, Inc., 10 NY3d 609 , 617-618 [2008]). Thus, absent an agreement expressly providing for posttermination commissions, plaintiff,
Concur — Acosta, J.P., Saxe, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.
Cases cited
- Yudell v. Ann Israel & Associates 248 AD2d 189 at 189-190 p. 671
- Tierney v. Capricorn Investors 189 AD2d 629 at 632 p. 671