Ranger v. Leo
Opinion of the Court
The action is for commissions by a real estate broker for procuring a purchaser for defendant’s property. The court directed a verdict for defendant, and denied a motion for a new trial. Plaintiff appeals.
Plaintiff’s evidence shows that there- was a hiring of plaintiff by defendant at an agreed commission, that defendant stated his price and enumerated certain incumbrances on the property, that plaintiff finally obtained a person able and willing to. purchase on defendant’s terms, subject to the incumbrances enumerated by defendant, and an agreement was made. Plaintiff called on defendant’s lawyer to have the contract drawn up, and learned for the first time that there was a restriction against nuisances. He inquired if there was any restriction against tenement houses, and was told by defendant’s lawyer that there were none. He communicated with the proposed purchaser, who said he would accept restrictions against nuisances, but not against tenements. When the parties met for the purpose of signing
Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.