
    HAPGOODS v. LYNCH.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    November 29, 1907.)
    Brokers—Employment Agency—Commissions.
    Where plaintiff, an employment agency, obtained' a temporary position for defendant, plaintiff was entitled, both under Employment Agency Law, Laws 1907, p. 589, c. 327, § 5, and the terms of the agreement between the parties, to 10 per cent, of defendant’s salary.
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.
    Action by Hapgoods against Morice A. Lynch. From a Municipal Court judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed. Judgment ordered for plaintiff.
    
      Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., and EEVENTRITT and ERLANGER, JJ.
    H. B. Bradbury, for appellant.
    James J. Quill, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The court below found in favor of defendant upon the disputed question of fact as to whether the position obtained by him was a temporary one or not. It follows from that finding that the plaintiff became entitled by the terms of the agreement between the parties, as well as by the provisions of the employment agency law (Laws 1907, p. 589, c. 327, § 5), to 10 per cent, of the defendant’s salary. It was, therefore, error to render judgment for the defendant.

The judgment is reversed, and in modification a judgment ordered in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $3.13 and $5 costs in the court below, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.  