
    Muriel TSCHAMLER v. Arthur KELLEY.
    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
    Argued May 1, 1984.
    Decided Oct. 5, 1984.
    
      Lipman & Parks, P.A. by Barbara L. Raimondi (orally), Sumner Lipman, Augusta, for plaintiff.
    Shapiro & Daly by Harold J. Shapiro (orally), Michael J. Daly, Gardiner, for defendant.
    Before McKUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, ROBERTS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.
   MEMORANDUM DECISION.

The Defendant appeals from an order of Superior Court, Kennebec County, affirming a judgment of the District Court, Augusta, in an action in which the Plaintiff recovered judgment from him for a brokerage commission on the rental of certain property in Randolph.

The record contains no evidence on the issue of whether the Plaintiff was a duly licensed real estate broker and the Defendant did not raise the issue in his answer or at trial. The Court is evenly divided on the question whether proof of a valid broker’s license is an essential element of the Plaintiff’s case by virtue of 32 M.R.S.A. § 4116 or whether absence of such a license must be raised as an affirmative defense pursuant to M.R.Civ.P. 8(e). Accordingly, the entry is:

By an evenly divided Court judgment affirmed.

All concurring.  