The subject provision provided in part as follows: That portion of the agreement specified the period of time following the expiration of the agreement during which the sellers would pay the broker's commission if the property were sold to a buyer who was introduced to the property during the period of the exclusive listing. In addition, the court found the listing agreement was not complete when it was signed, that the space providing for the so-called extended protection period had been left blank at the time the listing agreement was signed but had been filled in on the copy that Piechocki mailed to the Zunigas under cover of a letter dated April 15, 2005. Piechocki came to the Zuniga home and the parties signed the listing agreement and related documents, but the court found, based on the testimony of Zuniga, that Piechocki did not leave a copy of the listing agreement with the sellers at the time of the execution. The broker's representative was Christopher Piechocki, who had been a friend of Edison Zuniga for approximately ten years. The listing agreement disclosed that the broker offered a commission split of two percent minus $200 to potential cooperating brokers. The sellers agreed to pay the broker four and one-half percent of the offering price of $474,900 or of any sale price accepted by the sellers. On April 14, 2005, the Zunigas executed a standard multiple listing agreement granting to Coldwell Banker the sole and exclusive right to sell the Zuniga home in Bayonne from that listing date until the stated expiration date of June 14, 2005. We now reject such a bright line determination and reverse the May 25, 2006, order.
Aplus realty trial#
The trial court, nevertheless, determined that such a violation bars recovery. 45:15-17f would bar an action to recover a commission predicated upon a sale. In reaching that conclusion, the trial court noted that this court in Winding Brook Realty did not find it necessary or appropriate to reach the legal issue as to whether a violation of N.J.S.A. 119 (1980), the trial court dismissed plaintiffs' complaints, concluding that one who violates the public policy of the State as reflected in a statute should not be permitted to enforce a commission agreement. 45:15-17f in that the listing broker (1) had caused or allowed the sellers to sign the listing agreement with a significant term missing and (2) had failed to leave a copy on the day they signed it. The matters were consolidated and following a bench trial, the court entered judgment in favor of defendants, reasoning that the Exclusive Right to Sell Agreement (the listing agreement) was unenforceable because it violated N.J.S.A.
Aplus realty plus#
In separate complaints, plaintiff Coldwell Banker and plaintiff Exit A Plus Realty (Exit A Plus), sued the Zunigas and Lockett for real estate commissions which plaintiffs alleged were owed to them upon the closing of title between the Zunigas and Lockett. That sale occurred after the expiration of the exclusive listing agreement between Coldwell Banker and the Zunigas, but within what is referred to as the "extended protection period" under the agreement. Plaintiff Coldwell Banker Jablonski Real Estate (Coldwell Banker) appeals from a May 25, 2006, order dismissing its complaint for commissions allegedly earned as a result of a sale of real estate from defendants Edison and Teresita Zuniga, to defendant Sharon Lockett the buyer.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Goodman, of counsel and on the brief Jane J. Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis, attorneys for amicus curiae New Jersey Association of Realtors (Barry S.
Tarkan, attorney for respondents Edison Zuniga and Teresita Zuniga. Kiczek, attorney for appellant Coldwell Banker Jablonski Real Estate. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Special Civil Part, Hudson County, Docket Nos. (NOTE: The status of this decision is unpublished.)īefore Judges Axelrad, R.
0 kommentar(er)
