Case ID: ri-dec_1/html/0168-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Capotosto, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SUPERIOR COURT
    Emma De Rosiers vs. Max M. Pullman
    
    No. 57344
    RESCRIPT
    May 12, 1925.
   Capotosto, J.

This is an action for a broker’s commission for a sale of certain real estate on Pine Street in the City of Providence. The jury returned a verdict for $233.30. The defendant moves for a new trial upon the usual ground.

The plaintiff claims that the defendant personally asked her to find a customer for his property and that he promised to pay her a commission of two per cent on the sale price, that relying upon the defendant promise she interested a Mrs. Cutler in the property; that the property was in fact sold to Mrs. Cutler and that the defendant thereupon refused to pay-her the commission.

For Plaintiff: Fitzgerald & Higgins.

For Defendant: Robinson & Robinson, W. M. P. Bowen & F. H. Wildes.

The defendant maintains that he never made any promise to the plaintiff to pay her any commission and that the plaintiff’s claim was a “frame-up.”

The issue raised was purely a question of fact and credibility. The jury’s verdict is, in my opinion, supported by the weight of the evidence and, therefore, should not be disturbed.

Motion for new . trial denied.