delivered the opinion of the court.
Silverman v. Kromer, 185 Ill. App. 400 (1914)
March 10, 1914
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 19,171
185 Ill. App. 400
Abraham Silverman and Samuel Silverman, Defendants in Error, v. Lena Kromer, Plaintiff in Error.
Gen. No. 19,171.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. David Sullivan, Judge, presiding.
Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.
Reversed and remanded.
Opinion filed March 10, 1914.
Rehearing denied March 24, 1914.
Statement of the Case.
Action in the Municipal Court by Abraham Silver-man and Samuel Silverman against Lena Kromer to *401recover commissions as real estate brokers. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error.
Abstract of the Decision.
1. Bbokebs, § 88 * —when evidence insufficient to sustain recovery of commissions. In an action in the Municipal Court for commissions, where an allegation in the statement of claim that plaintiff had produced a purchaser for defendant’s property who was ready, willing and able to buy the property on the terms fixed by defendant was unsupported by the evidence, a finding for plaintiff is erroneous.
2. Appeal and ebbor, § 1034 * —when court rules not judicially noticed on review. The court on review will not take judicial notice of rules of the Municipal Court, same not being shown by the record.
Plaintiffs attempted to excuse their failure to prove that they had procured a purchaser ready, willing and able to purchase defendant’s property on defendant’s terms, as alleged in their statement of claim, on the ground that such allegation was not denied in the affidavit of defense and that under the rules of the Municipal Court allegations in the statement of claim not denied specifically or by necessary implication in the affidavit of merits are admitted; but the rules referred to were not contained in the record.
Shaeffer & Kompel, for plaintiffs in error.
Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for defendants in error; Joseph W. Moses, of counsel.