
    Henry F. Fullerton, Respondent, v. Auto Car Equipment Company, Appellant.
   Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented upon the ground that the plaintiff’s assignor was not the procuring cause of the sale of the automobile by the defendant and that there was no consideration for the alleged promise by the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s assignor without his performing any service whatever.  