Case ID: ill-app_203/html/0495-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Carnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George E. Sadler, Appellee, v. Jacob P. Schnelbacher, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 6,287.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Peoria county; the Hon. Clyde E. Stone, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1916.
    Reversed with finding of facts.
    Opinion filed August 10, 1916.
    Rehearing denied October 5, 1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by George E. Sadler, plaintiff, against Jacob P. Schnelbacher, defendant, to recover a commission as a real estate broker for effecting a lease of defendant’s premises. From a judgment for plaintiff for $7,500, defendant appeals.
    Plaintiff occupied an office with another real estate broker. They were not partners, but were frequently on opposite sides of deals. Plaintiff, learning from his office associate that the latter had a client wanting a business location, went to defendant, who showed plaintiff over his building and told plaintiff to have the party come there and he could do business. Plaintiff called again for more information which the party, through plaintiff’s associate, wanted, and thereafter the party came to the city and was introduced by plaintiff to defendant, and at a meeting in the office of defendant’s attorney a proposition for a lease was made by said attorney and at first accepted, whereupon plaintiff sug-gusted that defendant pay him a commission. Plaintiff’s testimony was conflicting as to whether defendant then refused to pay any commission or to pay the amount asked by plaintiff. He later refused to pay any. The lease was abandoned at that time because of a mistake in figures, and was later concluded elsewhere as a result of negotiations between the parties and said attorney in which plaintiff had no part.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Brokers, § 88
      
      —when evidence insufficient to show contract for sale of property on commission. In an action by a real estate broker against the owner of a building to recover a commission on a leasing of the building, evidence held, insufficient to show any contract, express or implied, between plaintiff and defendant in relation to any service to be rendered by plaintiff for defendant in relation to the renting of defendant’s property or by defendant to pay plaintiff for any services rendered.
    William Jack and Winslow Evans, for appellant.
    George W. Sprenger, for appellee; Weil & Bartley, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Carnes

delivered the opinion of the court.