The documentary evidence clearly establishes that plaintiff agreed to provide a tenant for premises owned by defendants' predecessor in interest in exchange for a portion of the rent collected from that tenant. Since plaintiff's role in the agreed upon transaction involved nothing but the provision of services in connection with leasing real estate, the real estate component was central, not incidental (see, Chappo & Co. v Riley Co.,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.