Case ID: nys_66/html/1144-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HASCALL, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SCHURK, Respondent, v. NUTTER, Appellant.
    (City Court of New York,
    General Term.
    October 29, 1900.)
    Action by Charles Schurk against Mary E. Nutter. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Gifford, Stearns & ¿Hobbs, for appellant. Thompson & Maloney,' for respondent.
   HASCALL, J.

It seems to us, from the testimony adduced upon the trial, that respondent sustained the allegations of his complaint by the necessary weight of evidence, which enabled the jury to say that the appellant promised or agreed to pay the commission sued for, or was cognizant of effort being made in her behalf for which, if successful, she would be obliged to pay the customary rate. We also find that the question was fairly submitted below. Judgment and order appealed from should he affirmed, with costs.

FITZSIMONS, C. J., concurs.