Hyperlawhypertext legal database Richtberg v. Carlton 108 N.Y.S. 1067

← Cases

Richtberg v. Carlton

108 N.Y.S. 1067 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1908-03-05 English

Delivered by MacLEAN, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 1067
RICHTBERG v. CARLTON.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
March 5, 1908.)

Headnote

Brokers—Compensation from Both Parties.
Where the agent for leasing premises admitted that he was seeking commissions from both the lessor and the lessee, he cannot recover compensation from the lessor, whether he effected a lease or not.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 8, Brokers, §§ 52-54.]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Tenth District.
Action by William Richtberg against John Carlton. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., and BISCHOFF and MacLEAN, JJ.
p. 1068
Poliak & Deutsch, for appellant.
Robert W. Todd, for respondent.

In view of the testimony of the plaintiff in this action to recover for services claimed to have been rendered, uporf request, to the defendant, and as the procuring cause of a leasing by the defendant to one Dempsey of certain premises, it is quite immaterial whether he did or did not effect the leasing, because on his own showing he was at one nonce trying to play inconsistent roles, secretly to serve with fairness two employers whose respective interests were irreconcilable—the one’s to hire on the lowest possible terms, and the other’s to lease for the best obtainable price; for he testified that he was looking for commissions from both parties, that! he was trying to serve both, trying to get the most he could for the lessor and to get the lessor down as he could for the lessee, and that he never told the defendant that he was representing the lessor. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.'

BISCHOFF, J., concurs. GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., concurs in the result.