Merigold v. Twentieth Century Theater & Amusement Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Merigold v. Twentieth Century Theater & Amusement Co.

199 Ill. App. 285

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 28, 1916

DocketGen. No. 21,290

StatusPublished

This text of 199 Ill. App. 285 (Merigold v. Twentieth Century Theater & Amusement Co.) 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

Merigold v. Twentieth Century Theater & Amusement Co., 199 Ill. App. 285 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Brokers, § 90*—when evidence insufficient to show termination of employment. In an action by a broker for commissions, evidence examined and held to show that plaintiff’s employment was not terminated nor abandoned by him. 4. Brokers, § 27*—when right to commission not affected. In an action by a broker for commissions where the evidence shows that plaintiff first presented to defendant a purchaser who offered and was able to pay the price fixed and who subsequently bought the premises for that sum, his right to his commission is not affected whether the purchaser acted for himself in purchasing or as agent of a company of which he was the president and controlling stockholder. 5. Brokers, § 37*—when evidence sufficient to show procuring cause of sale. In an action by a broker for commissions, evidence examined and held to show that he and not another was the procuring cause of the sale although he was not present at the execution of the contract, and though the amount of the monthly deferred payments was greater than he had offered. 6. Brokers, § 91*—when evidence insufficient to show fraud. In an action by a broker for commissions on the sale of realty, evidence examined as to agreement of plaintiff to divide commissions with one of defendant’s officers and held not to show fraud.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Brokers, § 90*—when evidence insufficient to show termination of employment. In an action by a broker for commissions, evidence examined and held to show that plaintiff’s employment was not terminated nor abandoned by him. 4. Brokers, § 27*—when right to commission not affected. In an action by a broker for commissions where the evidence shows that plaintiff first presented to defendant a purchaser who offered and was able to pay the price fixed and who subsequently bought the premises for that sum, his right to his commission is not affected whether the purchaser acted for himself in purchasing or as agent of a company of which he was the president and controlling stockholder. 5. Brokers, § 37*—when evidence sufficient to show procuring cause of sale. In an action by a broker for commissions, evidence examined and held to show that he and not another was the procuring cause of the sale although he was not present at the execution of the contract, and though the amount of the monthly deferred payments was greater than he had offered. 6. Brokers, § 91*—when evidence insufficient to show fraud. In an action by a broker for commissions on the sale of realty, evidence examined as to agreement of plaintiff to divide commissions with one of defendant’s officers and held not to show fraud.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 Ill. App. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merigold-v-twentieth-century-theater-amusement-co-illappct-1916.