From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cords v. Ruth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 16, 1906
115 App. Div. 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)

Opinion

November 16, 1906.

Ira B. Wheeler, for the appellant.

No appearance or brief for the respondent.


The plaintiff alleges an employment by the defendant for the purpose of effecting a sale of certain real estate for the sum of $8,500, and demands judgment for $212.50, being two and one-half per cent upon the purchase price. It was established upon the trial that the plaintiff went to the defendant and procured a written authority to sell the real estate in question for $8,500, the defendant agreeing to pay the commission of two and one-half per cent upon any price which he agreed to accept for the property. The written agreement provided that the authority should continue until the defendant revoked the same in writing. Prior to this authority, which bears date of November 25, 1905, the defendant had been in negotiation with one Johnson in reference to a sale of this same property, Johnson representing third parties. Soon after procuring the authority, the plaintiff entered into a negotiation with the said Johnson, resulting in Johnson making an offer of $8,000 for the premises, and it is conceded that this offer was rejected by the defendant. Subsequently, and on or before the twelfth day of December, the defendant withdrew the authority in writing, under the terms of the agreement, and at a later date entered into negotiations with the said Johnson which resulted in a sale of the property to the latter for $8,500, as alleged in the complaint. There is no allegation of fraud or bad faith on the part of the defendant; all that he did was to withdraw the authority, as he had a clear right to do, and he then entered into negotiations with a man whom he had known and negotiated with before the plaintiff came into the transaction, and this negotiation resulted in a sale. The plaintiff never procured a purchaser ready, willing and able to purchase the premises upon the terms fixed by the defendant, and under all of the authorities he is not entitled to recover in this action.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

HIRSCHBERG, P.J., GAYNOR, RICH and MILLER, JJ., concurred.

Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.


Summaries of

Cords v. Ruth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 16, 1906
115 App. Div. 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
Case details for

Cords v. Ruth

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES D. CORDS, Respondent, v . EDWARD RUTH, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 16, 1906

Citations

115 App. Div. 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
100 N.Y.S. 1043

Citing Cases

Cords v. Ruth

March, 1907. Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed on reargument on the opinion in the same case ( 115…