Case ID: misc_130/html/0394-01.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

Sam Zimmerman, Appellant, v. Joe Rubin and Another, Respondents.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 29, 1927.
    Brokers — real estate broker — broker is entitled to commission where sale is not completed through fault of vendor.
    A real estate broker who has produced a customer for the purchase of a store who is able, ready and willing to purchase on the vendor’s terms, is entitled to his commission although the sale is not completed through the fault of the vendor.
    Appeal by plaintiff from judgment of the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District, in favor of the defendants.
    
      Phillips, Jaffe & Jaffe [Moses Jaffe of counsel], for the appellant.
    
      Shattuck, Bangs & Winant [George B. Francis of counsel], for the respondents.
   Per Curiam.

This is an action to recover broker’s commissions on the sale of a store. The broker, who is the plaintiff, appellant, brought the parties together, and the purchaser agreed to the seller’s terms. Because of two misrepresentations made by the seller, the purchaser has been allowed to recover back the deposit which he made. The plaintiff, appellant, was not responsible for the non-completion of the transaction. Having brought a customer who was able, ready and willing to purchase on the seller s terms, he has earned and is entitled to the commission for which he sued.

Judgment reversed, with $30 costs to appellant, and judgment directed for plaintiff for $650 and costs.

All concur; present, Bi,tur, Levy and Crain, JJ.