From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davidson v. Howell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 1, 1914
160 App. Div. 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)

Opinion

January, 1914.

Present — Ingraham, P.J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.; Ingraham, P.J., dissented.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion.


I dissent upon the ground that the plaintiffs procured a purchaser and, as part of the contract of purchase, agreed that "neither of them shall be entitled to any commission whatsoever, unless title passes hereunder and this contract consummated." The answer alleges that the contract never was consummated, that no title ever passed, and, therefore, upon the express condition of their employment, the plaintiffs were not entitled to recover.


Summaries of

Davidson v. Howell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 1, 1914
160 App. Div. 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)
Case details for

Davidson v. Howell

Case Details

Full title:JOHN R. DAVIDSON and DAVID KRAUS, Respondents, v . GRACE H. HOWELL…

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

Date published: Jan 1, 1914

Citations

160 App. Div. 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)