From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kushin v. Yochelson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 22, 1939
256 App. Div. 1054 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Opinion

March 22, 1939.

Present — Sears, P.J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Taylor, JJ.


Judgment and order reversed on the facts and new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event, on the ground that the finding of the jury that the plaintiff was the procuring cause of the sale was against the weight of the evidence. The plaintiff's theory throughout the trial was to the effect that plaintiff was the procuring cause and the court charged that if plaintiff did not secure the purchaser he was not entitled to recover. In view of these circumstances the judgment cannot be sustained on the theory of bad faith embodied in plaintiff's request to charge, evidently founded upon the principle laid down in Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Company ( 83 N.Y. 378). All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an action to recover real estate commissions. The order denies a motion for a new trial.)


Summaries of

Kushin v. Yochelson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 22, 1939
256 App. Div. 1054 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)
Case details for

Kushin v. Yochelson

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL KUSHIN, Respondent, v. SHALOM YOCHELSON and FANNIE YOCHELSON…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 22, 1939

Citations

256 App. Div. 1054 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Citing Cases

Grace v. Dry Dock Sav. Bank

In such circumstances there is, of course, a total lack of consideration for any contract for mortgage broker…