(1) Owners having terminated broker's negotiations with a prospective customer, and themselves obtained an option directly from him; held, not entitled to plead the terms of such contract as a defense to the broker's right to commissions. Duncan v. Parker, 142 P. 657, 81 Wash. 340, L. E. A. 1915 A, 804.

(2) That a broker employed to sell lands, under a general contract, made a sale at a price lower than that originally demanded, is no defense in his action to recover commissions under an ordinary agency contract. Larner v. Harvey, 155 N. W. 427, 189 Mich. 249.

(3) It is no defense to an action by an agent to recover commission for selling real estate, that the principal does not hold title to the land. Sturgeon v. Culver, 124 P. 419, 87 Kan. 404, Ann. Cas. 1913 E, 341.

(4) Where defendant had voluntarily, without the plaintiff broker's consent, released the purchaser, refusal of the purchaser to buy the property was not available as a defense. Swift v. Moore, 82 S. E. 914, 15 Ga. App. 254.

(5) Where the owners agreed to accept a certain sum in lieu of performance of a contract procured by the defendant brokers; held, that they could not, as against defendants, deny that payment of such sum was equivalent to performance. Davis v. Rose-berry, 148 P. 629, 95 Kan. 411.

(6) Fraudulent misrepresentation made by a broker after defendant is brought to contract an exchange, will not constitute a defense to a suit for commission for procuring a customer ready, willing and able to trade, but with whom principal refused to carry out a contract for an exchange. Duncan v. Turner, 154 S. W. 816, 171 Mo. App. 661.

(7) In an action for commission for a sale of land under a written option to buy at a fixed price, it is no defense that the broker was also paid a commission by the purchaser to whom he assigned his option. Runnison v. Morrison, 76 S. E. 457, 71 W. Va. 254.

(8) If, after having made a valid agreement for an exchange of property, one party arbitrarily decides not to fulfil the agreement, he can not plead such change of mind against the broker in an action for commission. Neuer v. Jaffe, 165 N. Y. Sup. 113, 179 App. Div. 37.

(9) Though broker's contract provided for payment of commissions only when deeds for exchange of properties were delivered, and excepting, if exchange of deeds was prevented through fault of the principal, and broker had fully performed, want of exchange was no defense to claim for commission. Phelps v. Monroe, 165 N. W. 471, - Wis. Sup. - .

(10) In an action for commissions on a purchase of real estate, under a contract by which the plaintiff was to receive one dollar per acre for his services, in consideration of which he was to do all necessary work and secure a good title to the premises, the defendant cannot set up as a defense that the plaintiff was serving two masters, inasmuch as he was trustee for certain bondholders, who were the virtual owners of the property, if it appears that the plaintiff's connection with the bondholders had ceased at the time of the purchase. Walker v. Brown, 64 Pa. Super. Ct. 159.

(11) In an action for commissions for making an oil and gas lease, it was no defense that agent did not procure a written lease where non-performance of lease was due to lessor's own act. Strickland v. Palmer, 172 P. 932, - Okl. Sup. - .

(12) Where an executor, who was also a real estate broker, proposed to sell property belonging to a devisee on commission, that the owner was represented by an attorney, who dealt with the broker, constituted no defense as against a charge of bad faith on the broker's part in failing to give information as to the value of the land. McCulley v. Rivers, 170 N. W. 24, 200 Mich. 417.

(13) In an action by superintendent of apartment house, in which defendant had an apartment, for commission for his procuring a sub-lessee of defendant's apartment, defendant could not defend on the ground that if any commission was earned it belonged to plaintiff's employer, that being a matter between plaintiff and his employer, and no concern of defendant. Cadman v. Garcia, 182 N. Y. Sup. 797.