In Roman v. Lobe, 243 NY 51 [1926] the plaintiff "held a license for the year ending September 30, 1923" but "did not obtain a renewal license till October 26, 1923" (243 NY at 52). Judge Cardozo, writing for the Court, concluded that the plaintiff "was thus without a license on October 16, 1923, when the purchaser was procured and the cause of action arose" (id.). Even though the renewal was granted a mere 10 days after the services in question, plaintiff was barred from recovery of any brokerage commissions (id. at 57 [upholding the constitutionality of the licensing requirement and noting that "if he is without the needed license, he has only himself to blame, in that he did not ask for renewal till his license had expired"]).