Elser v. Hughes 183 Ill. App. 188

Benjamin G. Elser, Defendant in Error, v. Henry L. Hughes, Plaintiff in Error.

Glen. No. 18,538.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph Z. Uhlir, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed November 4, 1913.

*189Abstract of the Decision.

1. Brokers, § 37 * —when broker is procuring cause of sale. In an action to recover commissions for the sale of real estate, where the plaintiff procured a purchaser who made an offer which the owner declined to accept and the owner afterwards through another closed the deal on the terms of the offer, evidence 'held to justify a finding that plaintiff was the procuring cause of the sale.

2. Brokers, § 67 * —when part payment of commissions by check, not an accord and satisfaction. Finding that broker’s acceptance of a check given for commissions stating on its face “In full of all demands” did not constitute an accord and satisfaction, held sustained by the evidence where the evidence showed a concealment by the owner as to whom he sold the property and indicated bad faith and an intention on the part of the owner to deprive the broker of his commission.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Benjamin G. Elser against Henry L. Hughes to recover commissions for the sale of real estate. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant brings error.

George E. Dawson, for plaintiff in error.

Hoyne, O’Connor & Irwin, for defendant in error; Carl J. Appell, of counsel.