[Download] "Holton v. Shepard" by Supreme Court of Minnesota # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

eBook details

Title: Holton v. Shepard
Author : Supreme Court of Minnesota
Release Date : January 13, 1935
Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
Pages : * pages
Size : 64 KB

Description

RUGG, Chief Justice. This is an action of contract to recover a brokers commission in connection with the sale in 1928 of the Shepard Stores, so called, owned and conducted by the defendant in Boston and Providence. The declaration consists of three counts. It is alleged in the first count that there was an agreement between the parties that, if the plaintiff should produce a customer to whom the defendant should ultimately make or cause to be made a sale of the Shepard Stores, or the capital stock of the corporations owning and operating these stores, upon terms satisfactory to the defendant, the latter would pay to the plaintiff reasonable compensation, and that there has been performance of the agreement by the plaintiff. In the second count it is alleged that there was the same agreement as in the first count and performance by the plaintiff in procuring Edmund Seymour & Co., Inc., to whom the defendant made the sale, although nominally the sale was made to Sawyer Brothers, Inc. The third count is upon an account annexed for services performed by the plaintiff at the request of the defendant in procuring the sale of the properties. It is further alleged in each count that the liability of the defendant to the plaintiff is $100,000 plus interest. Although not so alleged, it is plain that all the counts are for the same cause of action. The defendants answer contains a general denial as to each count. It is averred as an additional defence that the plaintiff forfeited all right to a commission from the defendant if he had any connection with the matters alleged in his declaration by reason of having executed an agreement in writing with Edmund Seymour & Co., Inc., for a commission to be paid to him by it touching the matters alleged in the declaration, and that this agreement was unknown to the defendant. The defendant rested at the close of the plaintiffs evidence and presented a motion for a directed verdict in his favor on each count. This motion was denied subject to the defendants exception. The case was submitted to the jury under leave reserved and a general verdict returned for the plaintiff. Subsequently, upon motion and by order of the trial Judge, a verdict was entered for the defendant under the leave reserved. G. L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231, Â§ 120. The plaintiffs exception to the entry of this verdict raises the question of law to be considered.