Vreeland v. Vetterlein
Supreme Court of New Jersey
The plaintiff in this case was non-suited on the trial at the Hudson Circuit, and the case was certified to this court for its advisory opinion, on a motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff in this case was non-suited on the trial at the Hudson Circuit, and the case was certified to this court for its advisory opinion, on a motion for a new trial. The case made by the plaintiff was substantially as follows : That he was a real estate agent, and that the defendant applied to him to find him a customer for six acres of ground which he wished to sell; that defendant said his price was four thousand dollars an acre, but he would take somewhat less; that defendant informed plaintiff that other agents had the same property for sale, and that if he, the plaintiff, found a…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Beasley, Chief Justice.
The insistment on the part of *249the plaintiff was, that he had called the attention of the purchaser to the property sold, and was, in effect, the efficient cause of the sale.
This position would be tenable, if the sale had been the product simply of the acts of the plaintiff and the owner of the property. It is certainly true, as a rule of law, that, under ordinary circumstances, where a broker, employed to sell property, brings about an introduction of a buyer, and when a negotiation, resulting in a purchase, ensues on that…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Geo. H. Beckmann, Inc. v. Charles H. Reid & SonsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1957
- MacK v. RevickiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1957
- Leadership Real Estate v. HarperNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1993
- RA Intile Realty Co. v. RahoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1992
- Dobson v. WolffSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1952
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.