JEFFCOTT v. ERLES


84 N.J. Super. 70 (1964)

200 A.2d 820

HAROLD B. JEFFCOTT, PLAINTIFF, v. ARTHUR H. ERLES, DEFENDANT. THOMAS B. FAHERTY, PLAINTIFF, v. JOHN A. BECKER AND BETTE V. BECKER, DEFENDANTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, District Court, Burlington County.

Decided May 14, 1964.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the motion: Messrs. Dimon, Haines & Bunting (Mr. Martin L. Haines, appearing) attorneys for defendant Erles and defendants Becker.

Contra: Messrs. Powell & Davis (Mr. Robert E. Dietz, appearing) attorneys for plaintiff Jeffcott.

Messrs. Kessler & Tutek (Mr. Henry G. Tutek, appearing) attorneys for plaintiff Faherty.


WOOD, A.C., J.C.C.

The question presented by these two motions for summary judgment is whether a real estate broker who, having arranged a sale, engages in the unauthorized practice of law by preparing the agreement of sale, should be held, by reason of such act alone, to forfeit his right to a sales commission.

The cases before the court are two actions by realtors for the payment of commissions. In each, the defendant moves for summary judgment of dismissal...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases