Clancy v. Tansley

Judgment reversed, on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The plaintiff seeks a recovery for real estate commissions to which she claims she is entitled by virtue of a contract between the parties. The contract specified by its terms that the listing was under the “ Multiple Listing Service Plan ” of the Real Estate Board of Rochester, Inc. It was error, therefore, to exclude the rules governing such plan offered in evidence by the plaintiff. (Bibb V. Allen, 149 U. S. 481, 489; Clews v. Jamieson, 182 U. S. 461, 481; Gettys V.…