(143) Evidence held to show that the broker who signed escrow instructions had no authority, actual or ostensible, to charge the same. Jones v. Title Guarantee & Trust Co., 173 P. 586, - Cal. Sup. - .

(144) Realty brokers' complaint, if considered as seeking damages to extent of commissions on sale of realty of estate because of alleged prevention of performance; held insufficient, as failing to allege that brokers, within specified time, either before or subsequent to revocation of their authority by executrices, procured or could have procured purchaser ready, able and willing to buy at the price and on the terms fixed. Merheley v. Fish, 178 P. 945, - Cal. Sup. - .

(145) In broker's action for commission for the sale of mill property owned by defendants, in part for cash and in part for mortgage, evidence held insufficient to show that plaintiff was to be paid a commission only if the broker made sale for $250,000 cash. Johnstone v. Cochrane, 121 N. E. 529, - Mass. Sup. - .

(146) Where broker claimed as commission for procuring a lease, the whole of the fund of commission money deposited by lessor, with consent of above plaintiff and defendant brokers, with lessee, who subsequently deposited it in court, court is without power to divide fund on ground which brokers were a contributing factor in procuring lease, but must give fund to one or the other, the plaintiff or defendant, whichever might be found to have been the effective cause of closing the transaction. Lewis B. Preston, Inc. v. Bice, 173 N. Y. Sup. 691.

(147) A statement of claim against a broker which avers breach of contract to invest, sounds in negligence and not in deceit. Heiser v. Reynolds, 106 A. 888, - Pa. Sup. - .

(148) A declaration by the owner of city property against brokers whom she had engaged to trade it for farm land, who alleged that they fraudulently misrepresented the price at which the owner of the farm land was willing to dispose of the same, and thus made a secret profit; held, not open to demurrer, on the ground that it did not aver the brokers were not mere middlemen. Schmidt v. Wellinger, 99 S. E. 680, 125 Va. 361.

(149) A contract whereby a broker was to sell or offer real and personal property, providing for an ultimate sum, without reference to the separate value of any particular item; held, not severable as to the realty. Rugh v. Solein, 180 P. 930, - Or. Sup. - .

(150) The fact that plaintiff broker communicated to defendant, his principal, an opportunity to sell land for church purposes, and thereupon sent to the church authorities a map prepared by defendant indicating a favorable church location, and some time thereafter a sale of such property was actually made to the church, was sufficient, prima facie, to establish that such plaintiff was the procuring cause of the sale. Malia v. Douglaston Realty Co., 176 N. Y. Sup. 559.

(151) In action for commission for the sale of real estate, it is not necessary to show the financial standing of the person with whom the purchaser had made arrangements to borrow the money to pay for the land, and his ability to furnish the money, in order to show that a purchaser had been procured who was ready and able to purchase the farm, especially where testimony of the purchaser that he had the money to pay for the place was uncontradicted. Farrell v. Almgren, 211 I11. App. 654.

(152) In an action by a broker against a purchaser of land to have a lien declared on the land, there having been an agreement by the grantor to pay the broker a certain commission if a corporation leasing the land should exercise an option to purchase the land, evidence held sufficient to warrant the chancellor in finding that the sale to the grantee was colorable merely, and that the real sale was to grantee's brother, who was the major stockholder in the lessee corporation. Sanders v. Berry, 214 S. W. 58,

- Ark. Sup. - .

(153) In a suit by a corporation to recover from a real estate agent whom it had engaged to purchase a factory site, evidence held sufficient to establish that the agent occupied toward the corporation a fiduciary relation, so that he was not warranted in making a secret profit, H. J. Jaeger Co. v. Hannan, 108 A. 1,

- N. J. Eq. - .

(154) Damages for breach of contract to give commission of one dollar per acre for "following up work and closing land deals with customers," defendant doing the work himself, is not necessarily one dollar per acre, the amount depending on work saved and outlay which would have been required to earn the commission of one dollar per acre in a particular instance, and mere proof of breach of contract not being proof that any damage was suffered. Patterson v. Hohnson, 174 N. W. 363, - Iowa Sup. - .

(155) Where an owner of land employed an agent to sell for a flat price, making no misrepresentation of acreage, and the agent sold to the state under representation of acreage, accounting to the owner only on the basis of the authorized price, though in fact more was received; after abatement of price to be paid by the state on account of acreage shortage, the agent is not entitled to a corresponding credit for such shortage on his note to the owner. Solmon v. Deese, 218 S. W. 657, - Ark. Sup. - .

(156) Where a contract for the sale or exchange of real estate provided for a "regular fixed commission," as adopted by a named real estate exchange, the fact that only rate of commission so fixed was a maximum rate; held, not to render the contract ineffective, under Burns's Ann. Stat. 1914, Sec. 7463, such statute requiring only that the contract import to pay a commission, and provide a means of ascertaining the amount thereof, without destroying the character of the contract as a written instrument. Stockberger v. Zane, 125 N. E. 65, - Ind. App. - .

(157) In a suit by one broker against another to recover one-half of the commission for sale of realty, in which defendant's theory was that plaintiff was entitled to share in commissions only if sale was made to certain parties; evidence held to warrant finding for plaintiff. Treadwell v. Key, 215 S. W. 728, - Ark. Sup. - .

(158) Plaintiff, real estate broker, suing to recover commissions for making a sale of an apartment hotel, is not entitled, as a matter of law, to recover, where the evidence warranted finding that the sale was an independent transaction, with which neither plaintiff nor his assistant had anything whatever to do. Blanch-ard v. Liberty Trust Co., 125 N. E. 180, - Mass. Sup. - .

(159) For procuring lease, including agreement that, at its expiration, lessors and the lessee pay a percentage of costs of improvements, or grant a further term; held, in a suit brought before expiration of the first term commission, and on gross rentals for the first term alone, their claim for commission on the optional renewal lease not being determinable prior to the granting of such renewal lease by the lessors. McMahon v. Beard, 122 N. Y. Sup. 475.

(160) In an action by broker who introduced the purchaser to the seller, evidence held insufficient to show agency, it appearing that the broker ascertained the premises were for sale, and informed the vendor's wife that he would bring a client to view them. Ooetz v. Berman, 111 A. 235 (Del. Super.).

(161) In an action by a broker to recover a commission for procuring the sale of an oil lease, the defense was that the sale was procured through the misrepresentation and fraud of the broker, and as there was evidence tending to sustain the defense, and further, that because of the fraud a sale made was rescinded, it was the duty of the trial judge, upon request of the owner, to make a finding as to whether or not the broker was guilty of fraud in the transaction, and whether or not the sale so rescinded and the services of the broker became worthless because of the fraud of the broker. Langston v. Hoyt, 194 P. 654, - Kan. Sup. - .