From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Winakur v. Zeno

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Oct 31, 1935
181 A. 224 (Md. 1935)

Opinion

[No. 11, October Term, 1935.]

Decided October 31st, 1935.

Postponement of Trial — Sickness of Defendant — Action for Brokerage Commissions — Evidence.

The refusal to postpone the trial because of defendant's absence from court, complaining of sickness, held not an abuse of discretion, it appearing that defendant, though he had been sick, had been for two or more days attending his office, answering telephone calls there.

In an action for commissions on a sale of defendant's real estate, held that the evidence supported a finding of authority to sell, of a promise to pay a commission for procuring a sale, and an actual procurement thereof.

Decided October 31st, 1935.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City (STEIN, J.).

Action by Robert S. Zeno against Eleazer Winakur. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The cause was argued before BOND, C.J., URNER, OFFUTT, PARKE, SLOAN, MITCHELL, SHEHAN, and JOHNSON, JJ.

Louis Mitnick, for the appellant.

Benjamin L. Freeny, for the appellee.


Unreported cases.


Summaries of

Winakur v. Zeno

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Oct 31, 1935
181 A. 224 (Md. 1935)
Case details for

Winakur v. Zeno

Case Details

Full title:ELEAZER WINAKUR v . ROBERT S. ZENO

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Oct 31, 1935

Citations

181 A. 224 (Md. 1935)
181 A. 224

Citing Cases

Gorman v. Sabo

The right of a party to a cause to be present throughout the trial is not an absolute right in a civil case…