De Rosiers v. Pullman

Superior Court of Rhode Island

De Rosiers v. Pullman

1 R.I. Dec. 168

CourtSuperior Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMay 12, 1925

DocketNo. 57344

StatusPublished

This text of 1 R.I. Dec. 168 (De Rosiers v. Pullman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Rosiers v. Pullman, 1 R.I. Dec. 168 (R.I. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Capotosto, J.

This is an action for a broker’s commission for a sale of certain real estate on Pine Street in the City of Providence. The jury returned a verdict for $233.30. The defendant moves for a new trial upon the usual ground.

The plaintiff claims that the defendant personally asked her to find a customer for his property and that he [169]*169promised to pay her a commission of two per cent on the sale price, that relying upon the defendant promise she interested a Mrs. Cutler in the property; that the property was in fact sold to Mrs. Cutler and that the defendant thereupon refused to pay-her the commission.

For Plaintiff: Fitzgerald & Higgins. For Defendant: Robinson & Robinson, W. M. P. Bowen & F. H. Wildes.

The defendant maintains that he never made any promise to the plaintiff to pay her any commission and that the plaintiff’s claim was a “frame-up.”

The issue raised was purely a question of fact and credibility. The jury’s verdict is, in my opinion, supported by the weight of the evidence and, therefore, should not be disturbed.

Motion for new . trial denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI