
    Argued January 3,
    affirmed January 26, 1966
    CAMAROT v. LENTZ
    410 P. 2d 240
    
      Watson D. Robertson, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Davis, Jensen, Martin & Robertson, Portland.
    
      H. J. Camarot, Springfield, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.
    Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Sloan, Goodwin, Holman and Lusk, Justices.
   PER CURIAM.

In this -action plaintiff alleged that his assignor had loaned money to -defendant and asked for judgment on the alleged debt. Defendant, a real estate broker who had sold property for plaintiff’s assignor, denied any debt and alleged the money was paid to bim as part of a commission due him for the sale of property. The trial court found that the money was paid to defendant as a commission hut that the commission had been over paid and entered a judgment against defendant for the surplus amount the court found that defendant had received.

The evidence supports the trial court’s findings and the judgment entered. Affirmed.  