Amott, Baker & Co. v. Bing
| Decision Date | 26 February 1957 |
| Citation | 3 A.D.2d 706,160 N.Y.S.2d 805 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | AMOTT, BAKER & CO., Incorporated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alexander S. BING, Mathilda S. Bing, Peter Bing, et al., Impleaded etc., Defendants-Respondents. |
H. Plaut, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.
M. Pollack, New York City, for defendants-respondents.
Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. No opinion. Sup., 155 N.Y.S.2d 550.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
DONALD ZUCKER COMPANY v. Prime Properties, Inc.
...those new terms may be. See Amott, Baker & Co. v. Bing, 13 Misc.2d 797, 155 N.Y.S. 2d 550, 551 (Sup.Ct.1956), aff'd 3 A.D. 2d 706, 160 N.Y.S.2d 805 (1957). The standard by which the broker's performance is to be measured is to be found in the brokerage agreement, not the agreement or propos......
-
BROADSTONE REALTY CORPORATION v. Evans
... ... Supp. 65 it might be." Amott, Baker & Co. v. Bing, 13 Misc.2d 797, 798, 155 N.Y.S.2d 550, 551 (N.Y.Co.1956), aff'd, 3 A.D.2d ... ...
-
Poritzky v. Graff
...v. Mayers, 281 App.Div. 171, 176-177, 117 N.Y.S.2d 557; Amott, Baker & Co. v. Bing, 13 Misc.2d 797, 798, 155 N.Y.S.2d 550, affd. 3 A.D.2d 706, 160 N.Y.S.2d 805; McNamara v. Viscio, 10 Misc.2d 854, 173 N.Y.S.2d 681; O'Connor v. Pero, Co.Ct., 149 N.Y.S.2d 91, n. o. r.). What the broker seeks ......