Hawkins v. Taylor

Appellate Court of Illinois

Hawkins v. Taylor

186 Ill. App. 355

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 15, 1914

DocketGen No. 5,872

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 186 Ill. App. 355 (Hawkins v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hawkins v. Taylor, 186 Ill. App. 355 (Ill. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Brokers, § 90*—when evidence sufficient to sustain a recovery of commissions. In an action for a commission for selling real estate belonging to defendant, a verdict for plaintiffs and a special finding that plaintiffs were the procuring cause of the sale, held sustained by the evidence, it appearing that defendant had listed the premises with plaintiffs to be sold at a certain price and that the defendant had consummated a sale with a purchaser whom the plaintiffs had negotiated with for the purchase of the property. 2. Brokers, § 48*—when real estate agents entitled to a commission. Where real estate agents were the procuring and efficient cause of a sale they are entitled to a commission though the owner completed the negotiations. 3. Appeal and error, § 1002*—when sufficiency of evidence to support verdict not presented for review. Where the abstract does not show that the bill of exceptions contains a motion for a new trial, it does not show that the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is presented by the record. The clerk’s record cannot supply the omission.

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

Mr Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Brokers, § 90*—when evidence sufficient to sustain a recovery of commissions. In an action for a commission for selling real estate belonging to defendant, a verdict for plaintiffs and a special finding that plaintiffs were the procuring cause of the sale, held sustained by the evidence, it appearing that defendant had listed the premises with plaintiffs to be sold at a certain price and that the defendant had consummated a sale with a purchaser whom the plaintiffs had negotiated with for the purchase of the property. 2. Brokers, § 48*—when real estate agents entitled to a commission. Where real estate agents were the procuring and efficient cause of a sale they are entitled to a commission though the owner completed the negotiations. 3. Appeal and error, § 1002*—when sufficiency of evidence to support verdict not presented for review. Where the abstract does not show that the bill of exceptions contains a motion for a new trial, it does not show that the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is presented by the record. The clerk’s record cannot supply the omission.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 Ill. App. 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkins-v-taylor-illappct-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack