
    Max Bengels, Respondent, v. Lester I. Woods et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
   The papers demonstrate no genuine or bona fide claim on the part of plaintiff. Opposed to the documentary proof, plaintiff presents merely an ingenious, and palpably unsupported, device to transform a transaction in which he acted as a principal — and from which he had to recede — into a claim for brokerage commissions. Plaintiff does not produce any prima facie support for ignoring the contract of sale which he signed as a principal, and which expressly disclaimed the intervention of any broker in procuring the sale. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Yalente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.  