Form 46. - Complaint for Recovery of Broker's Commissions. Short. (First Form.)2

The City Court of Brooklyn.

JULIUS N. KELLEY, CHARLES H. MOLTER and FREDERICK D. KELLEY,

V.

Milton Buckley

The Plaintiffs Complain:

I. That in or about February, 1910, the defendant employed the plaintiffs to find for him a purchaser of him for money or exchange of other real estate, a certain farm situate at North Leominster in the State of Massachusetts, and that thereupon the plaintiffs entered upon the said employment and worked therein, and obtained and introduced one Manning to the defendant as the purchaser of the said property, and he agreed with the defendant to purchase the said property of the defendant on the terms stated, and held out by the defendant, through the plaintiffs, and to take a deed of conveyance thereof, and the bargain was struck between the defendant and said Manning, and a contract of purchase was entered into.

II. That the value and agreed price of the said services by the plaintiffs to the defendant was and is the sum of $750, but the defendant refuses to pay the same.

Wherefore, the plaintiffs pray for judgment against the defendant for the sum of $750 with interest and costs.

John J. Gaynor,

Atty, for Plffs. (Verified.)

Form 47. - Complaint for Recovery of Broker's Commissions. Short. (Second Form.)

The City Court of Brooklyn.

CHARLES B. RODNEY and GEORGE T. STEPHENS,

Plaintiffs, against

James Bunnell,

Defendant.

The complaint of the plaintiff respectfully shows to this Court:

I. That at the times hereinafter mentioned the plaintiffs were, and still are, copartners in trade, as real estate agents and brokers, doing business as such in the City of Brooklyn, under the firm name and style of Rodney and Stephens.

1 See Chs. XXXIV and XXXV supra. 2 See also Corbln's New Jersey Forms. No. 896.

II. That on or about the first day of April, 1910, the plaintiffs rendered certain services to the defendant at his request, as such real estate agents and brokers, in and about the selling of certain property situate on the Eastern Boulevard and Kings Highway in the Town of Utrecht, Nassau County, for which services defendant agreed to pay plaintiff two thousand dollars as commissions.

III. That no part of said sum has been paid, although payment thereof has been demanded.

Wherefore, plaintiffs demand judgment against the defendant for the sum of two thousand dollars with interest thereon from April 1, 1910, and costs of this action.

Doyle & Marshall,

Plaintiffs' Attorneys, Office and Post Office Address:

4 and 5 Court St., Brooklyn, N. Y. (Duly verified.)

Form 48 - Complaint for Recovery of Broker's Compensation. (Two Counts.)1

Supreme Court, County of Richmond.

Allen R. Callahan,

Plaintiff, against

JACK M. HASKELL and WALTER N. BEARDSLEY,

Defendants.

Complaint.

The plaintiff above named, through his attorney, Willis Clark, complains of the above-named defendants and alleges: For a First and Separate Cause of Action :

I. That the plaintiff is a resident of the County of Richmond, Borough of Richmond, City of New York.

II. That the plaintiff at all times hereinafter mentioned was and still is an attorney and counselor at law duly qualified as such, with an office and place of business in the Borough of Manhattan, New York City.

III. That between the 1st day of January, 1910, and the commencement of this action, plaintiff performed professional services for said defendants at their special instance and request, and upon their promise to pay therefor, which services were reasonably worth the sum of $3,604.38, and the plaintiff between said dates in performance of said professional services at the request of the defendants, paid out and advanced for and in behalf of said defendants, the sum of about $1,000.

IV. That by reason of the performance of said professional services there became due to said plaintiff the sum of $3,604.38, which sum defendants have not paid, and refuse to pay, although plaintiff has duly demanded suoh payment.

For a Second and Separate Cause of Action:

I. That the plaintiff is a resident of the County of Richmond, Borough of Richmond, City of New York.

1 This is permissible even under Code pleading. Logan v. Whitley, 129 App. D1t. 666 (N. Y. 1908).

II. That the plaintiff, at all times hereinafter mentioned was and still is an attorney and counselor at law duly qualified as such, with an office and place of business in the Borough of Manhattan, New York City.

III. That between January 1st, 1910, and the commencement of this action, the plaintiff, Allen E. Callahan, performed services as agent and broker in causing the sale for defendants of about 4,500 acres of land, for the price of $36,043.80, situated in Oakham township, St. Lawrence County, New York, which land was held and owned by defendants at all times herein mentioned, until about April 15, 1910.

IV. That said services were performed at the request of the defendants and for the reasonable value and agreed compensation of 10% of the selling price of said land, which sum said defendants promised and agreed to pay to the plaintiff herein.

V. That by reason of said sale there became due to the plaintiff the sum of $3,604.38, which sum the defendants have not paid and refuse to pay, although plaintiff has duly demanded such payment.

Wherefore, plaintiff demands judgment against defendants for the sum of $3,604.38 with interest from April 15, 1910, together with the costs and disbursements of this action.

Willis Clark,

Attorney for plaintiff. Office and Post Office Address:

No. 27 William St., New York City. (Verified.)

Form 49. - Motion for Interpleader in New York City Municipal Court.1

Municipal Court of the City of New York,

Borough of......................................... District.

John S. Bobins and Henry A. Bobins, a copartnership trading under the firm name and style of John S. Robins,

Plaintiffs, against

Frederick Lake,

Defendant.