From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zimmerman v. Rubin

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jun 29, 1927
130 Misc. 394 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)

Opinion

June 29, 1927.

Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District.

Phillips, Jaffe Jaffe [ Moses Jaffe of counsel], for the appellant.

Shattuck, Bangs Winant [ George B. Francis of counsel], for the respondents.

Present, BIJUR, LEVY and CRAIN, JJ.


This is an action to recover broker's commissions on the sale of a store. The broker, who is the plaintiff, appellant, brought the parties together, and the purchaser agreed to the seller's terms. Because of two misrepresentations made by the seller, the purchaser has been allowed to recover back the deposit which he made. The plaintiff, appellant, was not responsible for the non-completion of the transaction. Having brought a customer who was able, ready and willing to purchase on the seller's terms, he has earned and is entitled to the commission for which he sued.

Judgment reversed, with $30 costs to appellant, and judgment directed for plaintiff for $650 and costs.

All concur.


Summaries of

Zimmerman v. Rubin

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jun 29, 1927
130 Misc. 394 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)
Case details for

Zimmerman v. Rubin

Case Details

Full title:SAM ZIMMERMAN, Appellant, v. JOE RUBIN and Another, Respondents

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Jun 29, 1927

Citations

130 Misc. 394 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)
223 N.Y.S. 481

Citing Cases

Kirk Co. v. Styles, Inc.

Both are acknowledgments of indebtedness and an unconditional promise to play. Smith v. Treuthart, 223 N.Y.S.…