A count of a petition in an action on a written contract to pay a commission on a sale of land, which contract provided for a sale within 90 days, is demurrable, where it does not aver performance within 60 days, or plead matter relieving against such provision. Osborne v. Dannatt, 149 N. W. 913, 167 Iowa, 615.

Where a memorandum for the exchange of property stated that the broker's commission was to be a certain percentage, but did not contain an agreement to pay it, an allegation that the plaintiff refused to make the exchange or to comply with the terms of the memorandum is not an allegation of non-payment of the commission. John Reis Co. v. Post, 147 N. Y. Sup. 845, 162 App. Div. 463.

An allegation in an action for a broker's commission, that the executrix of the vendor of the property had unreasonably rejected a claim against the estate for the amount of the commission does not amount to an allegation that the commission had not been paid. Id.

A complaint for a broker's commission which does not allege that the commission had not been paid, is insufficient under Civil Code Proc, Sec. 481, subd. 2, requiring the complaint to contain a plain statement of the facts constituting the cause of action. Id.

A complaint by a broker for commissions for procuring a purchaser of real estate, which proceeds on the theory that the owner placed the property in the hands of the broker for sale on specified terms, that subsequently the terms were modified, and that the owner wrongfully refused to convey, is not predicated on any theory that the owner deceived or defrauded the broker. Little v. Gorman, 114 P. 321, 39 Utah, 63.

In an action against a real estate broker who had the exclusive sale of a piece of real estate to recover one-half the commission which the plaintiff claimed that the defendant had promised to him, if he would reveal the name of a purchaser, the statement of claim is fatally defective, if it merely avers the agreement, and that the plaintiff had revealed the name of the purchaser, hut fails to aver that the defendant continued as the agent for the sale of the property until it was actually sold to the person named by plaintiff, or that the sale was in fact the result of any action of the defendant. Neiman v. Ebert, 47 Pa. Super. Ct. 7.

Where plaintiff, suing to cancel a note and mortgage pursuant to an agreement that they would be cancelled as compensation for services as a broker, alleged that they had been merged in a new note and mortgage, he was not entitled to the relief asked without pleading and proving facts sufficient to void the new note and mortgage. Shriver v. McCann, 155 S. W. 317, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

Though the complaint, alleging contract that plaintiff should "render services" to defendants, as defendants' brokers and agents, in negotiating and procuring for them a lease, with an option to purchase, contains a general allegation of performance by him of all conditions of the contract, yet its special allegation of performance by him of all the conditions of the contract, and that he "rendered certain services" in procuring a lease, which contained an option to purchase, renders it insufficient as indicating there was a falling short of due performance. Kidder v. Govin, 176 N. Y. Sup. 776.

A complaint alleging that on a specified date defendant contracted to sell mining claims, that plaintiff, at defendant's instance and request negotiated such sale, that on the date specified defendant, in consideration of said services, agreed to pay plaintiff specified commissions, and that certain payments were thereafter made, did not show that the services were rendered pursuant to an express contract of employment. Case v. Ralph, 188 P. 640, - Utah Sup. - .

Under Comp. Laws 1917, Sec. 5817, the complaint in a broker's action for commissions for selling land must allege an express contract, either by stating it in full or by stating its legal effect, and it must appear from the contract that the agent was authorized to sell and the amount, terms and conditions upon which his commission was to be paid. Id.

Where complaint, in an action for commission for making a loan, alleged plaintiff had performed all conditions precedent, and specified acts of performance by him, and where a corporate company required performance of conditions precedent by plaintiff and a specified loan company, and where the facts alleged did not show due performance, a general allegation thereof did not show due performance, in view of Comp. Laws 1913, Sec. 7461. Felton v. Nurnberg, 179 N. W. 720, - N. D. Sup. - .