Case ID: ill-app_199/html/0320-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Barnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, Defendant in Error, v. Conrad Heegn, Plaintiff in Error.
    Gen. No. 21,500.
    (Not to toe reported in full.)
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Abitold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 28, 1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, plaintiff, against Conrad Heegn, defendant. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.
    It appeared from the statement of claim, in substance, that plaintiff was a real estate broker and at defendant’s request procured a purchaser for certain real estate belonging to defendant, to whom defendant sold the property for $9,600, and that there was due and owing plaintiff $250 as a commission for the sale, according to rates fixed by the Chicago Beal Estate Board.
    Issue wa,s taken in defendant’s affidavit of merits only on the question of the procuring cause of the sale, defendant alleging that plaintiff was not, but another broker was, the procuring cause thereof, and the trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $237.50.
    Plaintiff’s own undisputed evidence disclosed that there was no such contract as the implied contract sued on, but that there was an express contract that defendant would sell at a price to net him $9,500 and that plaintiff should get his commission or compensation from the purchaser. The defendant also made the same kind of arrangement with the other broker through whom the deal was closed at the price of $9,600 after plaintiff had been negotiating with the same purchaser at the price of $9,750. .The purchaser testified that he saved $150 in buying through the other broker.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Brokers, § Z%
      
      -when evidence insufficient to support verdict. In an action by a broker to recover commissions on the sale of real estate, evidence examined and held insufficient to support the verdict
    Albert Schaffner, for plaintiff in error.
    George E. Dawson, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.