Hyperlawhypertext legal database McCarty v. Tracey 34 N.Y.S. 1143

← Cases

McCarty v. Tracey

34 N.Y.S. 1143 Court N.Y.C.P. Decision date 1895-06-03 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1143
McCARTY, Appellant, v. TRACEY et al., Respondents.
(Common Pleas of New York City and County, General Term.
June 3, 1895.)

Headnote

Action by James E. McCarty against William Tracey and others for broker’s commissions.
William Riley, for appellant.
James J. Fitzgerald, for respondents.

It does not appear that the plaintiff was the procuring cause of the sale to Fursey. The fact that he overheard plaintiff telling a third person that the property had been sold to one Murphy at a certain sum, and. after the sale to Murphy had fallen through, bought it himself, is not sufficient evidence to show that plaintiff was the procuring cause, especially in view of the further fact that he was well acquainted with the defendants, and had previously learned from them that the property was for sale. Goldsmith v. Cook (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 14 N. Y. Supp. 878 . The answer sets up a good general denial, Griffin v. Railroad Co., 101 N. Y. 348 , 4 N. E. 740 . Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cases cited