Briggs v. Rowe
New York Court of Appeals
James A. Briggs and his partner sued Edward Rowe, in the Brooklyn city court, to recover a commission of one per cent, upon fourteen thousand dollars, for the sale of a house and lot of the defendant, alleged to have heen made by the plaintiffs as his brokers.
Read the full summary
James A. Briggs and his partner sued Edward Rowe, in the Brooklyn city court, to recover a commission of one per cent, upon fourteen thousand dollars, for the sale of a house and lot of the defendant, alleged to have heen made by the plaintiffs as his brokers. At the close of the testimony upon both sides upon the trial, the court refused to allow the plaintiffs’ counsel to go to the jury upon the question whether the plaintiffs had made out a cause of action, and nonsuited the plaintiffs; to which rulings and decisions exceptions were duly taken. Plaintiffs appealed. The facts are fully…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodruff, J.
The testimony given on the trial tended to prove, that in June, 1857, the defendant employed Sylvester Hondlow, a real estate broker, to sell the house and lot No. 43 Pierrepont-street, in the city of Brooklyn, with coach-house attached, and left with him the keys of the house. Hondlow placed thereon a notice or bill, “ For Sale — inquire of S. Hondlow & Co.”
In the end of January, or in February, 1858, Mrs. Sarah Ravenhill called upon Hondlow, and inquired if he had any houses to rent, and the subject of buying was mentioned. He directed her to Rowe’s. She wished a coach-house attached to the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moses v. . BierlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Jacobs v. KolffNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hanford v. ShapterNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1872
- Weinstein v. GoldingAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1896