Legal Opinion

Flicker v. Ragan

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided December 11, 1925Published

1Per curiam

The dismissal of the complaint was erroneous. The rule that a broker, in order to earn his commission, must produce a purchaser who is financially able does not apply where an enforcible agreement has been entered into for the purchase of the property. The seller is deemed to have indicated his satisfaction with such purchaser’s financial ability by executing the contract. (Corbin v. Mechanics & Traders’ Bank, 121 App. Div. 744; Alt v. Doscher, 102 id. 344; Slocum v. Ostrander, 141 id, 380; affd., 205 N. Y. 617; Jaffe v. Lederer, 113 Misc. 356.) The judgment is, therefore, reversed and a new…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Corbin v. Mechanics & Traders' BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
  2. Jaffe v. LedererAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1920
  3. Slocum v. . OstranderNew York Court of Appeals · 1912

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API