delivered the opinion of the court.
Stein v. Emerman, 203 Ill. App. 316 (1917)
Feb. 5, 1917
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 22,583
203 Ill. App. 316
Sidney L. Stein and Edward J. Ehrhardt, copartners, trading as Stein & Ehrhardt, Defendants in Error, v. Herman Emerman, trading as H. Emerman & Company, Plaintiff in Error.
Gen. No. 22,583.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Denis E. StmnivAN, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
Reversed and judgment of nil capiat.
Opinion filed February 5, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Sidney L. Stein and Edward J. Ehrhardt, copartners, trading as Stein & Ehrhardt, plaintiffs, against Herman Emerman, trading as H. Emerman & Company, defendant, to recover on a contract between real estate brokers to pay plaintiffs four hundred dollars as their part of a commission in making a loan. From a judgment for plaintiffs for four hundred dollars, defendant brings error. >
William Friedman, for plaintiff in error.
*317Abstract of the Decision.
Contracts, § 294 * —when performance is condition precedent to maintenance of action for breach. Under a contract between real estate brokers whereby defendant agreed to pay plaintiffs a part of a commission in making a second mortgage loan and providing that the amount specified should be paid plaintiffs when the money on the mortgage was paid, held that the right of the plaintiffs was dependent on the making of the loan as a condition precedent, and that they could not recover under such contract without first showing that the loan was in fact made.
Isidore S. Blumenthal, for defendants in error.