Sec. 164. Abandonment By Broker

Where a broker opens negotiations, but, failing to bring the customer to the specified terms, abandons them, and the employer subsequently sells to the same person at the price fixed, he is not liable to the broker for commissions.35 "The fact that a sale or exchange of the property is finally brought about by the efforts of the principal or another broker, with a person with whom the first broker had previously negotiated without success, will not furnish a legal basis for a claim for commissions by the first broker, especially when it appears that the first broker has for a long time ceased negotiations with the purchaser, and abandoned all efforts to induce him to take the property on the proposed terms." 36 Abandonment by the broker is matter of defense.37

32 Gilder v. Davis, 137 N. Y. 506 (1893). 33 Barber v. Hildebrand, 42 Nebr. 405 (1894).

34 Condlct v. Cowdrey, 139 N. Y. 273 (1893). And see Lawrence v. Rhodes, 188 111. 90 (1900) ; Block v. Ryan, 4 App. D. C. 283 (1894).

35 Markus v. Kenneallv, 19 Misc. 517 (N. Y. 1897) ; Moore v. Cresap, 109 Iowa 749 (1899) ; Singer v. Hutchinson, 61 111. App. 308 (1895). See also Davis v. Gas-sette, 30 111. App. 45 (1888).

36 Davis v. Gassette, 30 111. App. 45 (1888), (citing Lipe v. Ludewick, 14 111. App. 372; Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Works, 83 N. Y. 378). See also Sec. 97, 98 supra and 237 infra.

37 Moore v. Boehm, 45 Misc. 622 (N. Y. 1904). See also Sec. 336 infra.