The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-05-16
Court OF COmmOn Pleas.
Before Hon. Judge Daily.
SUIT FOR COMHssION-THE MURRAY HILL Pr

SUIT FOR COMMIssION-THE MURRAY HILL PRO.
PERTY.
MAY A.-Wm A. Kealetas Us. 7nos. AcElra.h and
Isaac c. Delaplaine -Ths occupied the court for
more than two days. The plaintiff sues assignee OF
Renard Co., who the assgnses Of Francis L. wad
dell The claim is for $1,l5O, alleged to be due
mission the purchase Of twenty lots OF ground
Fifth avenue, between Thirty seventh and Thirty eighth
streets. The plaintiff contended that he negoated the
purchase and the defendan took possession of
lots and accepted aud approved Of the title. This the
defendants deny, and set up that Mr.. Wadde who
ton for the lowest sum at which /. could Do obtained
falsely stated to DEFENDANTS that it could not bought
for less than consequence Of which state
ment they paid the last mentioned and ma ie said
agreement and that before the making and delivery
OF the agreement In the comp amt the said Francis
liam Coventry II. Wsddsll, the owner of the pro-
perty. to dispose Of said for the sum Of Sos 600.
to Francis L. Waddell for his own use al money re-
esyed upon the sale Of the property over the sum Of
pressed this fact from the defendants and that
much he hao ed $40 000 in consequence a that
fraudulent suppression therefore the present claim is
void.
After the examination Of several Witnesses letteg
from VIM c. Wadds to his brother Frank produced,
in which the writer ssysH you can get siob eco ior
Of that amount Of indebtedness which attaches it,
from shoulders you will dispose OF it. and for your
trouble therein and e1srons to accomplish IT. you can
Mr.. 6. cambridge Smith, counsel for plaintiff
tnceO tnet tnere was no evidence 10 snow tnet
L. Wadde the agent Of the defendants in the pur-
chase Of the property, but that the contrary waa
clear that he was the agent Of his BROTHER Me- c. b.
Waddel that fraud could not be assumed tina, it Was
immaerial what price had been paid and that the fun
knowledge Of The transaction by all the parties,
waiver of any right their part to set the slega
tion OF fraud by Of Defence and he ASKED
the Court to instruct the jury, these grounds that
they should find for plaintiff.
The Court refused to do and Mr. G. A. Wacdel was
examined by Mr. Smith, and stated that he did not
collect writing the letter that had been produced he
would not have taken SOS 900 for the property he
sdered it worth s16 0oO his brother authorized to
sell the property for him.
M F. L. Wadden dsposed 10 the negotiations Of Mr..
Deapaine for the purchase Of the property and thAt
Mr. d. said he preferred to give witness legal mmia
sion rather than specified sum OF 81, 600; Mr. Della.
paine told witness that Mr.. Nc zlrath associated
with him In the purchase and wanted him 10 take Mr.
lcnths notes for part Of the purchase; witness
sented IL Mr. d. would endorse them, and he said he
always acknowledged the debt Of $50 for commission
and said it would have been paid only the plaintiff sued
pr II.
Thos. NcFrah, for the defence deposed that he met
Mr.. Coventry Wadde one day after the money had beeu
lodged for the purchase and he told him that he had
determined to sell the property for less than worth,
in order to pay of some membranes, and that he
thought $685. 900 the lowest he could take for it,
that the hrst intmaion witness had Of the be-
ing sos 000 he considered himself victimised to the
amount Of 600 by somebody. Mr.. Delaplatne and
Mr. F. L. Waddell endeavorsd to convince witness that
SIS 900 the amount understood by all parties and
- he thought the property worth that he
liberation for the purchase Counsel having summed upA
the jury rendered verdict for plaintiff for 81 288 80,
icing the claimed, with interest TO which tho
Court added an allowance Of $50.