ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff Michael J. Sacca, d/b/a Sacca Associates International Real Estate, a real estate broker seeking a commission arising out of a real estate transaction, was not the "procuring cause" of the transaction, an essential component of an action to recover a broker's commission (see, Lanstar Intl. Realty v. New York News, 206 A.D.2d 411; Mollyann, Inc. v. Demetriades, 206 A.D.2d 415). The plaintiffs did not raise triable issues of fact as to the defendants' bad faith (see, H.H. Hill Realty Servs. v. Cummings, 244 A.D.2d 525).
We reject the defendants' contention that the plaintiffs' conduct in bringing these appeals was frivolous and that sanctions should be assessed against the plaintiffs (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.
S. MILLER, J.P., O'BRIEN, FRIEDMANN, and FLORIO, JJ., concur.