Where a broker, in an action for services in procuring defendant a purchaser for land, claimed that both parties had signed and delivered duplicate contracts for sale, and defend-130 ant claimed that after he signed the papers the purchaser took them and signed only after making material alterations therein, and that he thereupon refused to re-execute the contract as altered, and that they were never delivered, it was error to refuse an instruction that if, after defendant executed the contracts, they were altered before the purchaser executed them, and were never subsequently re-executed, there was no meeting of minds. Bruce v. Hurlbut, 66 N. Y. S. 1127, 54 App. Div. 616. See also Sec. 33.