Opinion
May, 1928.
Appeal from Surrogate's Court of the County of Oneida.
Present: Hubbs, P.J., Sears, Crouch, Taylor and Sawyer, JJ.
We think there was enough in the evidence offered on behalf of claimant to make a prima facie case showing an implied contract. The order of the Surrogate's Court should, therefore, be reversed on the law and facts and the matter remitted for a new hearing. Since the question was not raised, we express no opinion as to whether the provisions of article 12-A of the Real Property Law relating to real estate brokers are applicable to claimant. All concur.
Added by Laws of 1922, chap. 672, as amd. — [REP.
Decree reversed on the law and facts and matter remitted to the Surrogate's Court for a new hearing, with costs to appellant to abide event.