In the absence of a special contract a broker was not entitled to a commission on merely bringing a purchaser who was ready, willing and able to pay the price demanded, where no sale was made because of a disagreement as to when the transfer should take place. Haase v. Schneider, 98 N. Y. S. 587, 112 App. Div. 336. See also Sec. 541.

In an action for services in selling an estate for defendant, where he did not know till after the sale that plaintiff had done anything to aid it, circumstances held to warrant a decision that there was evidence for the jury of a continuing offer, of an acceptance, and of performance by the plaintiff of the contract to obtain a purchaser. Barnstein v. Laus, 104 Mass. 214; Storer v. Markley, 164 Ind. 535, 73 N. E. 1081.

Where a broker did not find a purchaser at the request of the owner, and submit the purchaser's offer, at his request, to the owner, he is not entitled to a commission from the owner. John v. Thrower, 75 S. E. 819, 11 Ga. App. 494.

A broker is entitled to his commission when he has found a purchaser or a lender, as the case may be, ready, able and willing to purchase the property or to lend the money, in accordance with the terms proposed by the principal. Eggland v. South (S. D. Sup. '08), 118 N. W. 719; Beckley v. Newton, 140 I11. App. 301; Munsonv. Carlstrom (Iowa Sup. '09), 119 N. W. 606; Mutchnick v. Davis, 114 N. Y. S. 997; Little v. Her-zinger, 34 Utah, 337, 97 P. 639; Caruthers v. Reeser, 134 I11. App. 370; Masterson v. Knight, 135 I11. App. 548; Glover v. Duffy, 112 N. Y. S. 1099; Hutto v. Strigh, 157 Ala. 566, 47 So. 1031; Peach River Lumber Co. v. Montgomery, (Tex. Civ. App. '08), 115 S. W. 87; Sotsky v. Ginsberg, 114 N. Y. S, 114; Smith v. Sharp (Ala. Sup. '09), 50 S. 381; Beougher v. Clark, 106 P. 39, 81 Kan. 250, 27 L. R. A. (N. S.) 198; Knisely v. Leath, 166 S. W. 207, 256 Mo. 341, 178 S. W. 453; Moore v. Moss, 175 S. W. 1195, 117 Ark. 593; Boot v. Barbour, 118 P. 968, 51 Colo. 399; Stevens v. Bacher, 141 S. W. 1143, 162 Mo. App. 284; Ault v. Boberts, 143 P. 1140, 44 Okl. 143, rev. judg.

on re. 130 P. 532; Bellis v. Hann & Kendall, 157 S. W. 427, - Tex. Civ. App. -; Shaw v. Faires, 165 S. W. 501, - Tex. Civ. App. -; Eichoff v. Bussell, 149 P. 146, 46 Okl. 312; 0. L. & H. J. Gross v. Tillinghost, 86 A. 721, 35 B. I. 298; Robertson v. Allen, 184 F. 372, 107 C. C. A. 254; Notkins v. Poshalinsky, 76 A. 1104, 83 Conn. 458, 20 Ann. Cas. 1023; Smith v. Tatum, 79 S. E. 775, 140 Ga. 719; Phillips v. Brown, 120 P. 454, 21 Idaho, 62; Barney v. Yazoo Delta Land Co., 101 N. E. 96, 179 Ind. 337; Avery v. Howell, 137 P. 785, 91 Kan. 297; Phillips' Ex'r v. Rudy, 143 S. W. 397, 146 Ky. 780; Gore v. Griffith Realty Co., 169 S. W. 685, 160 Ky. 241; Miller v. Haddock, 82 A. 701, 109 Me. 98; Wheeler v. Lawler, 110 N. E. 273, 222 Mass. 210; Armstrong v. Martin, 137 N. W. 143, 171 Mich. 291; Blakeslee v. Peabody, 147 N. W. 570, 180 Mich. 408; Lanx v. Hoge, 123 P. 949, 45 Mont. 445; Rauchwanger v. Katzin, 82 A. 510, 82 N. J. Law, 339; Crutchfield v. Webster, 120 P. 615, 31 Okl. 142; Carson v. Vance, 130 P. 946, 35 Okl. 584; Reynolds v. Anderson, 132 P. 322, 37 Okl. 368, 46 L. E. A. (K S.) 144; Hall v. Olson, 114 P. 638, 58 Or. 464; McGilvery v. Lawrence, 152 N. W. 698, 35 S. D. 443; Middle Atl. Immi. Co. v. Ardan, 78 S. E. 588, 115 Va. 148; Wiggins v. Wilson, 45 S. 1011, 55 Fla. 346; McCabe v. Jones, 124 N. W. 486, 141 Wis. 540; Canadian Imp. Co. v. Cooper, 161 F. 279, 88 C. C. A. 325; Kelley v. Peacock, 76 S. 547, 115 Miss. 555; Raleigh R. E. Co. v. Moser, 95 S. E. 498, 175 N. C. 255. And in case of a sale, when the broker has procured an enforceable contract of sale upon the principal's terms. Moss & Raley v. Wren (Tex. Sup. '08), 113 S. W. 739.

A real estate agent has only authority to find a purchaser and report him to the owner, and, in the absence of a special agreement to that effect, he has no power to conclude a sale. Minto v. Moore, 55 S. 542, 1 Ala. App. 556; Davis v. Clausen, 57 S. 79, 2 Ala. App. 378.

After a broker has produced a purchaser who has entered into a contract of purchase, the fact that he endeavors to sell such purchaser other property does not constitute an abandonment of the first transaction and deprive him of the right to commissions, if he has produced a purchaser ready, able and willing to purchase. Cowan v. Day, 156 I11. App. 105.

To entitle broker to commission, the purchaser procured must actually purchase upon the terms agreed, unless his failure to do so is caused by the vendor's fault. Moore v. Councilman, 81 A. 122, 115 Md. 629.

Agent does not have to produce a purchaser "known" to seller to be able, ready and willing to execute a contract. Smith v. Sharp R. E. Co., 77 S. 40, - Ala. Sup. - .

Realty broker's agreement with landowner to procure a customer would have been performed to the extent that he, as exclusive agent to get buyer, might recover commissions, if landowner had made either an actual sale to customer introduced by him, or agreement binding such customer to buy. Bruce v. Me-serve, 117 N. E. 830, - Mass. Sup. - .

A broker is entitled to commissions, having found a purchaser ready and willing to buy on authorized terms, though owner then withdrew property from market, she having a few days later closed a trade with such purchaser on such terms. Ferguson v. Quick, 78 S. 618, 117 Miss. 692; judg. rev. on sug. of er., 79 S. 83.

Where broker took a prospective buyer to his principal, and the prospective buyer decided that he would not purchase, and thereafter approached the principal and entered into an agreement with him to furnish a purchaser, and returning the next day with a friend as purchaser, disclosed that he had been bargaining for this friend, instead of himself, from the beginning, and a sale was made, the broker was entitled to his commission. Hodges v. Ramsey, 216 S. W. 568, - Mo. App. - .

Arrangement by prospective purchaser with a bank to have money paid to owner directly, on sale of land, at a certain time was, in fact, having the actual money in the bank as such time, as required by the contract of sale, and would involve the fact whether or not the purchaser was ready at such time to comply with his contract, so that brokers would be entitled to their commissions. Dennis v. Autrey & Ellis, 220 S. W. 471, - Ark. Sup. - .

Where broker's claim to a commission rests merely on his finding a purchaser, and not upon efforts whereby the purchaser was induced to make the purchase, the act of the broker must be the foundation of the negotiations between the purchaser and the seller. Low v. Paddock, 220 S. W. 969, - Mo. App. - .

Real estate broker held entitled to commissions for procuring a purchaser for defendant's realty, irrespective of his agreement, unsupported by consideration, to postpone his right thereto until price was paid by buyer. Bernstein v. Fulson Realty Co., 152 N. Y. Supp. 995.

Readiness and willingness of the prospective purchaser to buy does not establish a broker's right to compensation for producing him; entry, or offer to enter, into a binding contract with the vendor, being essential. Massie v. Chatom, 127 P. 56, 163 Cal. 772.

To entitle a broker to recover on a contract by an owner of land to pay him a commission for making a sale of the land at a stated price, he must have fulfilled the contract by procuring a purchaser to whom a sale is made at such price, or who is willing and able to pay it, and it is not sufficient to procure one with whom the owner makes an exchange of lands. Payseno v. Swensen, 178 F. 999.

A broker to recover commissions must either show a sale made to the purchaser procured by him, or that the purchaser was able and willing to buy, and that failure to sell was through no fault of the broker or customer. Carrington v. Graves, 89 A. 237, 121 Md. 567; Stevenson v. Bannan, 84 A. 447, 235 Pa. 512; Speer v. Benedum-Trees Oil Co., 86 A. 695, 239 Pa. 180; 8. V. Thompson Co. v. Goldman, 51 Pa. Super. Ct. 632.

If a broker who has an exclusive agency to sell not coupled with an interest, before notice or knowledge of a sale by owner, has performed his part of the contract in good faith by procuring a purchaser on terms fixed by the owner, the owner is liable to the broker for the stipulated commissions. Staats v. Mengel-sen, 180 N. W. 78, - Neb. Sup. - .

In a broker's action for commission for finding a purchaser ready, able and willing to buy, it was immaterial that the owner's agent closed the sale on terms not precisely as prescribed by the owner, when the owner refused to sell the property to the purchaser found by the agent solely because he had made a premature sale to another purchaser, and not because of a variance in the terms of sale. Moore v. Gould, 193 P. 1057, - Kan. Sup. - .

A broker taking a prospective purchaser to owner of land with no authority from the owner was not entitled to a commission, where a sale was agreed on but none consummated. Meachem v. Baker, 226 S. W. 967, - Mo. Sup. - .