#### Max Gittelson et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Fannie Reichman and Samuel Reichman, Defendants in Error.

Gen. No. 18,329.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the March term, 1912.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed December 22, 1913.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Max Gittelson, J. Bloom, I. Breskin and S. Goldberg against Fannie Beichman and Samuel Beichman for brokery commissions on a sale or exchange of real estate. To reverse a judgment of nil capiat and for costs against the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs prosecute a writ of error.

Harry M. Fisher, for plaintiffs in error.

Albert Martin, for defendants in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Brown

delivered the opinion of the court.

*87Abstract of the Decision.

Judgment, § 405 * —when decree in equity no bar to action for brokers' commissions. In an action to recover commissions for the sale or exchange of real estate wherein the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case, a decree in a cause in equity to which the plaintiffs were not parties, nor by which they were bound because in privity with or represented by the actual parties, held not admissible to bar plaintiffs’ right to recover where there is no evidence connecting the plaintiffs with the decree so as to make it binding on them.