Daily Development for Tuesday, August 24, 2004
by: Patrick A. Randolph, Jr.
Elmer F. Pierson Professor of Law
UMKC School of Law
Of Counsel: Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin Kansas City, Missouri dirt@umkc.edu
BROKERS; LICENSING; UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF REAL BROKERAGE: Where the dominant
feature of a sale is the transfer of real property, a “consultant” who arranges
the sale must have a real estate license in order to collect a fee.
Panarello v. Segalla, 776 NYS 2d 360 (A.D. 2 Dept. 2004)
Owner of a country club entered into an agreement to pay a consultant a fee upon
sale of the club property to a buyer secured by the consultant.
Consultant contacted a real estate broker who introduced him to potential buyers
in exchange for a split of the fee. The buyers eventually bought the property
for $14.25 million and consultant and his broker friend agreed to reduce the fee
to $500,000. The country club occupied only 170 acres of the 640 acre property
sold. The deal closed, but the seller stiffed the consultant and his friend.
They sued for the fee.
The trial court found for the consultant, but the appeals court reversed. It
held that the seller owed no fee, because the consultant was not licensed and,
under New York law, therefore not entitled to collect a commission for services
in furtherance of a real estate sale transaction. Although a license is not
required for a party to perform a function as a consultant to a sale of a
business, it is required if the transaction involves the sale of real estate.
The court concluded that the primary asset involved in the sale was the real
estate. It emphasized that the listing agreement that is was for the sale of “
real estate and property consisting 700+ acres” and the sale agreement allocated
no value to the personal property or intangible assets of the country club
business. The same was true of the Real Property Transfer Tax return. Even the
consultant’s own marketing plan emphasized the development value of the land,
rather than the operating value of the country club.
Although the case is vague, it appears that the broker also lost out because he
had no separate fee agreement with Seller.
Comment 1: Certainly a painful lesson here for our consultant and his friend,
but one that they should have learned in real estate school. New York’s rule is
tougher than many other jurisdictions’. In many states, the court will not
uphold a commission agreement, but will recognize an action in quantum meruit if
the unlicensed party’s efforts in fact result in a successful sale. Usually the
award in such cases is a market rate commission.
Comment 2: Many unlicensed parties attempt to act as “finders, ” arguing that if
their sole function is simply to introduce the parties, they do not fall within
the licensure statutes. This actually works in a few places, but more often the
scope of the real estate licensure statute elminates any argument that “finders”
aren’t included.
Comment 3: In fact, many lawyers try to hide behind one of the two exceptions
set forth above, at least when cornered. They may have performed brokerage style
services in the misapprehension that the exception in real estate licensure
statutes for legal services permits them to take a commission for promoting a
sale. In fact, the largest number of jurisdictions has ruled that the “legal
services” exemption is available only when lawyers are performing as lawyers,
which usually requires that they pay a fee commensurate with the nature of their
lawyer’s services. Typical sales commissions can rarely be justified on this
basis.
The editor wrote about all this in a (now somewhat outdated) article entitled
“Thinking About Being a Lawyer/Broker?” Think Again.” http://dirt.umkc.edu/files/art2.htm
The article was inspired by ethical rules then existed or were being considered
that have seen been abandoned. The editor still thinks that serving in both
capacities is a bad idea, and certain to lead one into ethical quagmires.
Items reported here and in the ABA publications are for general information
purposes only and should not be relied upon in the course of representation or
in the forming of decisions in legal matters. The same is true of all commentary
provided by contributors to the DIRT list. Accuracy of data and opinions
expressed are the sole responsibility of the DIRT editor and are in no sense the
publication of the ABA.
Parties posting messages to DIRT are posting to a source that is readily
accessible by members of the general public, and should take that fact into
account in evaluating confidentiality issues.
ABOUT DIRT:
DIRT is an internet discussion group for serious real estate professionals.
Message volume varies, but commonly runs 5 15 messages per work day.
Daily Developments are posted every work day. To subscribe, send the message
subscribe Dirt [your name]
to
listserv@listserv.umkc.edu
To cancel your subscription, send the message signoff DIRT to the address:
listserv@listserv.umkc.edu
for information on other commands, send the message Help to the listserv
address.
DIRT has an alternate, more extensive coverage that includes not only commercial
and general real estate matters but also focuses specifically upon residential
real estate matters. Because real estate brokers generally find this service
more valuable, it is named “BrokerDIRT.” But residential specialist attorneys,
title insurers, lenders and others interested in the residential market will
want to subscribe to this alternative list. If you subscribe to BrokerDIRT, it
is not necessary also to subscribe to DIRT, as BrokerDIRT carries all DIRT
traffic in addition to the residential discussions.
To subscribe to BrokerDIRT, send the message
subscribe BrokerDIRT [your name]
to
listserv@listserv.umkc.edu
To cancel your subscription to BrokerDIRT, send the message signoff BrokerDIRT
to the address:
listserv@listserv.umkc.edu
DIRT is a service of the American Bar Association Section on Real Property,
Probate & Trust Law and the University of Missouri, Kansas City, School of Law.
Daily Developments are copyrighted by Patrick A. Randolph, Jr., Professor of
Law, UMKC School of Law, but Professor Randolph grants permission for copying or
distribution of Daily Developments for educational purposes, including
professional continuing education, provided that no charge is imposed for such
distribution and that appropriate credit is given to Professor Randolph, DIRT,
and its sponsors.
DIRT has a WebPage at:
http://cctr.umkc.edu/dept/dirt/
-----
To be removed from this mailing list, send an email message to
listserv@listserv.umkc.edu with the text SIGNOFF BROKERDIRT.
Please email manager@listserv.umkc.edu if you run into any problems.
See <http://www.umkc.edu/is/cs/listserv/unsubscribing.htm> for more information.