Eletz v. Goodelman

159 N.Y.S. 161
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided May 26, 1916·Published

Opinion

COHALAN, J.

The plaintiff sued to recover upon oral pleadings the sum of $200 as a broker’s commission. The answer was a general denial. Upon the trial the following written memorandum was put in evidence by the plaintiff:

“I, the undersigned, hereby agree, in consideration of one dollar to me paid in hand, to pay Mr. S. Eletz two hundred dollars commission ($110 in cash and three monthly notes at $30 each), provided my store is sold to Mr. Green-berg. [Signed] I. M. Goodelman.”

[162]*162It clearly obligated the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of $200, provided the store was sold to Mr. Greenberg. The plaintiff was a broker of drug stores, and the defendant employed him to find a purchaser for his store, and through his agent negotiations were entered into with Mr. Greenberg, and the latter subsequently, and in a reasonable time, purchased the store. The defense that another broker intervened and sold the drug store at a commission of $50 should not avail the defendant, on the facts adduced on the trial and the memorandum in evidence.

The judgment is reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for the sum of $200, with interest and costs. All concur.

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

Eletz v. Goodelman, 159 N.Y.S. 161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

159 N.Y.S. 161 (Eletz v. Goodelman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.