Majority
p. 974GREENBERG v. AMERICAN TECHNICAL BOOK CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Term. January 10, 1901.) Argued before O’GORMAN and GIEGERICH, JJ.
Headnote
Principal and Agent—Contracts—Breach—Compensation.Where an agent is unable to complete his part of a contract, and thus entitle himself to commissions thereunder, because of his principal’s breach of the contract, his remedy is an action for damages for the breach, and not by suit for the commissions he might otherwise have earned.
Appeal' from city court of New York, general term.
Action by Edward E. Greenberg against the American Technical Book Company. From a judgment of the general term, city court of New York ( 65 N. Y. Supp. 1134 ), affirming a judgment of the trial term in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Kellogg & Beckwith (S. Vila Beckwith, of counsel), for appellant.
George C. Coffin (Edgar W. Williams, of counsel), for respondent.
This action was brought to- recover damages sustained in consequence of defendant’s alleged breach or abandonment of an agreement made by him with the plaintiff. It is not brought, as the defendant erroneously suggests, to recover commissions. It is true, plaintiff would not be entitled to commissions as such until earned under the terms of the contract; but, if plaintiff was unable to complete his right to commissions because of con
p. 975
duct of the defendant which worked a breach of the contract, it cannot be said that in such a case the plaintiff was without redress. His remedy was the one pursued in this case,—an action for damages for the breach. Upon the issue raised by the pleadings there was ample evidence requiring the submission of the case to the jury, and, as there are no exceptions requiring notice, the judgment must be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.