Case ID: nys_64/html/0037-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LORD v. MORAN.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    April 16, 1900.)
    Brokers—Compensation.
    Where a broker procures a lender who is willing to loan money to defendant on terms acceptable to the latter, he is entitled to commission therefor, though defendant refuses to take the loan.
    Appeal from municipal court, borough of Manhattan, Second district.
    Action by Walter K. Lord against John Moran. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before BEEKMAH, P. J., and G2EGERICH and O’GORMAN, JJ.
    Woolsey Carmalt, for appellant.
    Mayer & Josephson (Isaac Josephson, of counsel), for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

This case involves, substantially, only a question of fact, upon which there was a sharp conflict of testimony. The judgment is amply supported by the evidence. The justice having found that the plaintiff produced competent parties as proposed lenders, who were ready and willing to make the loan upon terms acceptable to the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to the stipulated commissions, notwithstanding the defendant’s refusal to complete the transaction. Van Orden v. Morris, 19 Misc. Rep. 497, 43 N. Y. Supp. 1108. The exceptions taken during the trial do not present any ground for reversal.

As we are satisfied from a careful consideration of the evidence that the decision of the justice is in all respects correct, the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.