(44) In an action by a broker for compensation, evidence held to sustain finding for plaintiff, on a claim by defendant that he had withdrawn the land from sale. Hall v. Olson, 114 P. 638, 58 Or. 464.

(45) In an action for broker's commission, evidence held to justify a finding that the first contract negotiated between defendant and the purchaser was abandoned, and reopened negotiations through another channel, and that plaintiff was employed for that purpose. Meldrum v. Southwick-Sellars Land Co., 147 N. W. 1086, 157 Wis. 367.

(46) Evidence, in an action for commission on an exchange of property; held, to show that the transaction had proceeded no further than preliminary negotiations. Osburn v. Addington, 138 P. 603, 91 Kan. 586.

(47) In a broker's action for commission, evidence held to show a completed agreement of sale and purchase between the seller and buyer produced by plaintiff, though no written contract was made at the time. Concanun v. Point Min. & Mill Co., 135 S. W. 988, 156 Mo. App. 79.

(48) In an action for division of broker's commission, evidence held to support a finding that plaintiff procured purchasers for the land in question, or rendered such services in connection with the sales as would entitle him to compensation under the contracts of employment. Hageman v. O'Brien, 141 P. 33, 24 Cal. App. 270.

(49) In an action by a real estate broker for commission, evidence held insufficient to show that the broker "actually brought about the consummation of a sale." Baldino v. Henneberry, 191 I11. App. 368.

(50) In an action by a real estate broker to recover commission for a sale of land, another broker having first made efforts to sell the land to the same purchaser, plaintiff need only show that he was the efficient cause of the sale, and need not deduce direct evidence of an abandonment by the other broker. Fenton v. Miller, 134 N. W. 95, 153 Iowa, 747.

(51) Evidence, in a broker's action for commission; held, insufficient to show that a sale was made by plaintiff, or by any one acting in his stead. Starbird v. J. H. McShane Timber Co., 142 N. W. 683, 94 Neb. 79.

(52) In an action by a broker to recover commission for a sale of real estate, the introduction of the property to the notice of the purchaser, and the subsequent purchase of it by the latter, is not sufficient evidence that the service rendered by the broker was the important and efficient cause of the sale, where there is evidence that plaintiff had entirely discontinued his efforts to sell the property for a considerable period of time after he had introduced defendant to the purchaser, and the testimony, both of defendant and the purchaser, is that the purchaser bought the property directly from defendant, without the intervening agency of plaintiff. Barrow v. Newton, 48 Pa. Super. Ct. 382.

(53) Evidence, in a broker's action for commission for procuring purchaser for land; held, insufficient to show that certain written directions embodying the terms of sale, which were left with the bank with which the deed and the purchaser's mortgage were deposited, did not relate to the production of purchasers ready and able to purchase. Peterson v. Kenady, 120 P. 402, 60 Or. 554.

(54) In an action for commission on the sale of a hotel, evidence held sufficient to support a finding that the services were performed for defendant, although it was claimed that the lease of the hotel and the furniture were owned by the son, defendant's manager. Smith v. I. Geverfy & Sons, 135 P. 190, 67 Or. 25.

(55) Evidence, in an action to recover a commission for procuring a purchaser for realty, pursuant to written authority; held to show, at most, an attempted oral ratification of the services performed by the broker in securing a purchaser, and an oral promise by the son to pay for the benefit received as a commission and percentage of the bid made for the property, if the offer were accepted. Slotboom v. Simpson Lumber Co., 135 P. 889, 67 Or. 516, Ann. Cas. 1915 C, 339, re. den., 136 P. 641, 67 Or. 516.

(56) In an action for broker's commission, proof that the broker, who admittedly had no exclusive agency, offered the property to the city, and that the city thereafter purchased it, is not sufficient to entitle him to a commission. Taylor v. Peterson, 147 P. 520, 76 Or. 77.

(57) Evidence, in an action by plaintiffs to recover on defendants written agreement to pay $220 for plaintiff's services in procuring a loan upon defendant's farm; held, not to warrant recovery. Miller v. Weaver, 153 P. 465, 78 Or. 594.

(58) Evidence, in an action for broker's commission; held, insufficient to show that a purchaser was procured by the broker. Powell v. King, 135 N. W. 719, 29 S. D. 94.

(59) Where a commission was claimed, both by a real estate broker and by the purchaser of the land, evidence held to sustain a finding awarding the commission to the broker. Withers v. Armstrong, 142 S. W. 932, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

(60) Evidence held to support a finding that the owner fraudulently withdrew the property from the broker to defeat the right to commission earned. Anderson v. Crow, 151 S. W. 1080, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

(61) Evidence, in an action for commission for assisting in an exchange of realty, in which there was an issue as to commissions from both parties; held, to sustain a finding that defendants knew that plaintiff had undertaken to find a purchaser for the other party to the exchange. T. A. Hill & Son v. Patton & Schwartz, 160 S. W. 1155, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

(62) A broker's evidence that he made the contract; held, to establish a prima facie case, without proving by each of the purchasers. E. R. & D. C. Kolp v. Brazer, 161 S. W. 899, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

(63) In a broker's action for commission, evidence held to warrant finding that the list price was to be net to defendant, exclusive of commission. Ridenhower v. Collins, 171 S. W. 1078, - Tex. Civ. App. - .