HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 255 (A. F. OF L.), ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
CASABLANCA OPERATING COMPANY, A PARTNERSHIP COMPOSED OF SAUL COHEN, SAM COHEN, HERBERT ROBINS AND SIDNEY RAFFEL, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A real estate broker sued the purchasers of property for allegedly depriving him of his commission through fraudulent dealings with the seller. The Florida Supreme Court held that the broker had no viable cause of action against the purchasers, as the broker's contractual relationship was solely with the seller, and dismissed the complaint.
The court held that the broker has no cause of action against the purchasers on either count. The first count fails because the brokerage contract was between the seller and broker alone, and if the transaction was completed according to the listing, the broker's remedy, if any, is against the seller, not the purchasers. The second count, alleging tortious interference and fraud, is fatally insufficient as pleaded, though it might potentially be strengthened by adequate allegations at law.
“The brokerage contract was between the seller and the broker and if the transaction was closed by the seller with the purchasers on terms according to the listing with the broker, then the broker still has his right of action, if any, against the seller but not against the purchasers with whom he had no contract.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that the broker's contractual relationship is solely with the seller, and purchasers cannot be held liable for non-payment of commission.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCohen, a real estate broker, alleged that he had listed Jaffe's motel interest for sale with an agreement to receive commission for procuring a ready,…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed on authority of Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Hotel Employees Union, Local No. 255 (A. F. of L.), Fla., 92 So. 2d 415.
TERRELL, C. J., and HOBSON, DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.