Case Name: Harry Poritz, Appellant, v. Harry Sunshine, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1925-04-09
Citations: 125 Misc. 837
Docket Number: 
Parties: Harry Poritz, Appellant, v. Harry Sunshine, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 125
Pages: 837–838

Head Matter:
Harry Poritz, Appellant, v. Harry Sunshine, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
April 9, 1925.
Joseph Gans, for the appellant.
Robert S. Dubois, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:.
Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant, for the determination of the amount of commission only.
It is undisputed that defendant authorized the plaintiff to find a customer for bis store and that defendant knew that plaintiff would ask for a commission, although defendant claims there was no talk about a commission. That plaintiff induced Grill to consider the purchase of the store is undisputed. The fact that plaintiff did not participate in the negotiations makes no difference; nor is the right to commission affected by the fact that the defendant, as he claims, did not know that plaintiff sent Grill to him. (Metcalfe v. Gordon, 86 App. Div. 368, and cases cited.) There is, therefore, no controverted question of fact except the amount of commission.
Present: Cropsey, Lazansky and MacCrate, JJ.