Case Name: William H. Alden et al., Appellants, v. William P. Earle, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-06-03
Citations: 121 N.Y. 688
Docket Number: 
Parties: William H. Alden et al., Appellants, v. William P. Earle, Respondent.
Judges: All concur.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 121
Pages: 688–689

Head Matter:
William H. Alden et al., Appellants, v. William P. Earle, Respondent.
(Argued May 9, 1890;
decided June 3, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior' Court of the city of New York, made January 7,1889, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a. verdict directed by the court, and granted a new trial.
This action was brought by plaintiffs, real estate brokers, to. recover commissions for renting certain premises belonging to-defendant. After discussing the evidence, the court here say r
“We think the facts bring the case within the rule declared in Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Co. (83 N. Y. 381). There is. no pretence of bad faith on the part of the defendant. The negotiations conducted by the plaintiffs may have contributed and undoubtedly did contribute to render more easy the agreement finally reached. But the compensation of the plaintiffs was contingent upon their effecting the leasing of the premises to Merwin, Hulbert & Co. It cannot be said as matter of law at least, that they performed this condition.
“ The order granting a new trial should, therefore, be affirmed and judgment absolute rendered for the defendant on the stipulation, with costs.”
John K. Cravey for appellants.
Hamilton Odell for respondent.

Opinion:
Andrews, J.,
reads for affirmance of order and for judgment absolute on stipulation against plaintiffs.
All concur.
Order affirmed and judgment accordingly.