McCarty v. Tracey

34 N.Y.S. 1143
New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided June 3, 1895·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

It does not appear that the plaintiff was the procuring cause of the sale to Fursey. The fact that he overheard plaintiff telling a third person that the property had been sold to one Murphy at a certain sum, and. after the sale to Murphy had fallen through, bought it himself, is not sufficient evidence to show that plaintiff was the procuring cause, especially in view of the further fact that he was well acquainted with the defendants, and had previously learned from them that the property was for sale. Goldsmith v. Cook (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 14 N. Y. Supp. 878. The answer sets up a good general denial, Griffin v. Railroad Co., 101 N. Y. 348, 4 N. E. 740. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

McCarty v. Tracey, 34 N.Y.S. 1143 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

34 N.Y.S. 1143 (McCarty v. Tracey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Griffin v. . Long Island Railroad Co.
4 N.E. 740 (New York Court of Appeals, 1886)
Goldsmith v. Cook
14 N.Y.S. 878 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1891)