State v. Daly
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On certiorari. On or about November 1st, 1891, the defendant stated to ■the plaintiff that she desired to sell certain of her property, consisting of a house and lot on Warren street, corner of Grand street, Jersey City.
Read the full summary
On certiorari. On or about November 1st, 1891, the defendant stated to ■the plaintiff that she desired to sell certain of her property, consisting of a house and lot on Warren street, corner of Grand street, Jersey City. The plaintiff, who is a real estate ■agent in Jersey City, advised the defendant to sell the property at auction, and on the same day the defendant requested the plaintiff to take charge of said sale and employ an auctioneer, and agreed to give to the' plaintiff, for the services of such auctioneer, two per cent, of the amount that should be realized at the sale, and agreed…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Dixon, J.
We think that this case is not within the statute» The plaintiff below did not sue to recover a commission for the sale or exchange of any real estate, nor was the defendant’s agreement, on which the suit rested, one to pay him for such a service. What the plaintiff had done under the defendant’s employment was to advertise the property for sale at auction and to secure the services of an auctioneer. Although,, according to the original bargain, his right to compensation for this service might depend upon the sale of the property by the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Stout v. HumphreySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
- Sherman v. Clear View Orchard Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1915
- Kent v. Phenix Art Metal Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1903