M. Dean Kaufman, Inc. v. American Machine & Foundry Co.
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Kernan v. One Washington Park Urban Renewal Associates (N.J. 1998)
- Tayyib Bosque, Corp v. Emily Realty, LLC (District Court, S.D. New York 2019)
- KAZMER-STANDISH, ETC. v. Schoeffel Instrument (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1981)
- Coleman v. Dover Corporation (District Court, E.D. Tennessee 1974)
- Ass'n Group Life, Inc. v. Catholic War Veterans (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1971)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered
We affirm essentially for the reasons given by the Appellate Division. 102 N. J. Super. 1 (App. Div. 1968). However, without proof that it is generally recognized in the finder’s business or profession that “in contracts of this type, absent specific contractual language to the contrary, there is an implied prerequisite of 'authority to offer’ which must exist between the candidate and the agent-broker” (102 N. J. Super. 9), we are not prepared to agree with that conclusion of the Appellate Division.
Affirmed.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weinteatjb and Justices Jacobs, Eeancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Hake-man — 7.
For reversal — None.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.