On appeal from the District Court.
For the appellant, Corbin & Harty.
For the appellee, Samuel Hochman (Charles Convery, of counsel).
Before Justices Trenchard, Parker and Perskie.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
PERSKIE, J. The question for decision on this appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff rendered by the judge of the First District Court of the city of Paterson, sitting without a jury, is whether there was an authorization in writing pursuant to R.S. 25:1-9, so as to entitle plaintiff to recover a commission upon a sale of real estate.
From the state of case which has been agreed upon, we learn that plaintiff, a licensed real estate broker, brought suit to recover the sum of $100 allegedly due him as a commission arising from a sale by defendant bank of real estate, owned by it, in the city of Paterson, and sold to one William Dimond, on December 4th, 1937, for $1,500.
It appears that on February 27th, 1937, following some preliminary negotiations, a representative of defendant wrote to plaintiff as follows:
"In reference to the property on the corner of Madison and Eighth avenues, Paterson, which you informed me you have sold for us for $1,500, we understand you will have a contract drawn for bargain and sale deed to be delivered to your purchaser, price to be $1,500 all cash, and title to be passed on or before March 15th, 1937, you to receive $100 commission.
"This is not to be construed as a contract."
Plaintiff answered that letter on March 3d, 1937, stating in effect that his client was not satisfied with defendant's proposition. He submitted a counter-proposition which was rejected and the sale to the client referred to in that letter was never consummated.
Nothing transpired between plaintiff and defendant with respect to the sale until November 5th, 1937, when, again through the assistant cashier, defendant ...