Case Name: Samuel Pett, Respondent, v. William Van Zandt Batchelder and Mary A. G. Batchelder, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1915-11
Citations: 171 A.D. 900
Docket Number: 
Parties: Samuel Pett, Respondent, v. William Van Zandt Batchelder and Mary A. G. Batchelder, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 171
Pages: 900–900

Head Matter:
Samuel Pett, Respondent, v. William Van Zandt Batchelder and Mary A. G. Batchelder, Appellants.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 26 th day of March, 1915, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered on the 31st day of March, 1915, denying a motion for a new trial.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
We think the verdict of the jury that there was any enforeible contract to pay the plaintiff a commission by the defendant on the purchase of this property was against the weight of evidence. The finding of the jury that such a contract existed should, therefore, be reversed, the judgment and order appealed from reversed, and new trial, ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event. Present — Ingraham P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Dowling, JJ.; Ingraham, P. J., and McLaughlin, J., concurred in the reversal of the judgment, but think the complaint should be dismissed. Judgment and order reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellants to abide event.