Pease & Elliman, Inc. v. Hopt

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Pease & Elliman, Inc. v. Hopt

136 Misc. 825, 242 N.Y.S. 180, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1279

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided May 8, 1930·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff broker had substantially performed his duty when the conclusion of the transaction was deliberately prevented by defendant’s refusal to proceed.

The risks of failure assumed by a broker, as enumerated in the leading case of Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Co. (83 N. Y. 378, 383, 384), do not include bad faith on the part of the employer.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff for the amount demanded in the complaint, with costs.

All concur; present, Bijur, Callahan and Peters, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff broker had substantially performed his duty when the conclusion of the transaction was deliberately prevented by defendant’s refusal to proceed.

The risks of failure assumed by a broker, as enumerated in the leading case of Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Co. (83 N. Y. 378, 383, 384), do not include bad faith on the part of the employer.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff for the amount demanded in the complaint, with costs.

All concur; present, Bijur, Callahan and Peters, JJ.

Pease & Elliman, Inc. v. Hopt, 136 Misc. 825, 242 N.Y.S. 180, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1279 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

136 Misc. 825 (Pease & Elliman, Inc. v. Hopt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related