Where a broker has not been guilty of misconduct and is the moving cause of a sale, he is entitled to his commission even though the parties do not carry out their agreement. Nunn v. Barber, 207 Okla. 393, 249 P.2d 999; Poston v. Buchanan, 203 Okla. 520, 223 P.2d 539; Childs v. Moore, 57 Okla. 638, 157 P. 333; Deming Inv. Co. v. Britton, 72 Okla. 145, 179 P. 468. The third main ground advanced by the Waggoners for reversal is that the trial court erred in failing to find the forfeiture provision in the contract invalid in that it provided for a penalty in the event of their nonperformance.

" Again, in the case of Childs v. Moore et al., 57 Okla. 638, 157 P. 333, the court said: "A provision in a contract providing that, should either party make a default in the terms thereof, each agrees to pay the adverse party the sum of $100 as liquidated damages, is void, when by the nature of the case it would not be extremely difficult to fix the actual damages for breach of the contract."

The rule appears to be well settled in this jurisdiction that, where a real estate broker is employed to procure a purchaser for property and seeks to recover commission for making a safe which has not been completed, it is necessary for him to prove that he had a purchaser who was ready, willing and able to purchase, and when he procures a contract from the purchaser to buy which is enforceable against him, and executed by the seller, he has earned his commission. See Gilliland v. Jaynes, 36 Okla. 563, 129 P. 8; Childs v. Moore, 57 Okla. 638, 157 P. 333; McCartney v. Shores, 77 Okla. 273, 188 P. 663; Pliler v. Thompson, 84 Okla. 200, 202 P. 1016. The other assignments of error of plaintiff in error are subdivided as follows:

On motion for judgment against sureties on supersedeas bond. Motion sustained. For former opinion, see 57 Okla. 638. 157 P. 333. E.M. Carter and Charles A. Dickson, for plaintiff in error.