Heerwagen v. Ritzman

City of New York Municipal Court

Heerwagen v. Ritzman

11 Misc. 727, 65 N.Y. St. Rep. 875

DecidedMarch 15, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 11 Misc. 727 (Heerwagen v. Ritzman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Heerwagen v. Ritzman, 11 Misc. 727, 65 N.Y. St. Rep. 875 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Ehrlich, Ch. J.

The action is for brokerage in procuring a customer for certain premises known as Eo. 532 Einth avenue, this city.

The case involved the questions whether the plaintiffs had been employed to make the sale, and whether they weie the procuring cause thereof.

The court left these questions to the jury under a clear charge, and "they found that the plaintiffs had been employed by the defendant, and that the purchaser had been procured through their instrumentality.

The evidence sufficiently sustains the jury’s finding, and the judgment and order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs.

Newburger and Van Wyck, JJ., concur.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

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