In Tankoos v. Levine (135 NYS2d 195 [1954]), two individual plaintiffs and a corporate plaintiff, who were real estate brokers, sought to recover commissions from the defendant arising out of a transaction whereby defendant was to purchase the corporate stock of the owner of a building in Manhattan. The individual plaintiffs alleged a separate cause of action claiming that they were hired by defendant, that they performed and that defendant defaulted; the corporate plaintiff alleges a hiring by defendant who was to pay the agreed brokerage upon purchase of the same stock procuring the owners thereof to sell, and defendant's default. The agreements on which they relied were separate, and plaintiffs sought damages from the same defendant on different theories arising out of defendant's breach of the agreements. The Court found that although the common features of the agreements are the subject property and the price, such factors "did not present common questions of law or fact. The property involved and price thereof are incidents to the contract. The main issues of law and of fact are whether or not agreements were made, plaintiffs performed and defendant breached. Establishment of these component parts of one cause will not establish them in the other." Thus, each plaintiff was required to serve a separate complaint.