In Keviczky v. Lorber, 290 NY 297 (1943), the Court of Appeals found that the evidence presented at trial, which the jury accepted, stated that: "What the plaintiff broker is here claiming is that through a conspiracy which was illegal and fraudulent, entered into by these defendants, plaintiff was prevented from procuring a purchaser, and that if that scheme had not been put into operation plaintiff [broker] could have procured the purchaser and would have earned his commission. . . . Upon this record it is a fair inference, and in the finding of the jury the inference is implicit, that the deal would have closed and that plaintiff [broker] would have received his commission had not defendants, by means of this conspiracy to refrain from dealing with plaintiff, prevented plaintiff from earning his commission. . . . When appellants and [another party] conspired to refrain from dealing with plaintiff [broker] and thus, although accepting the fruits of his labors, prevented him from earning the commission which was due him as a part of the transaction, the closing of which brought benefits to all the conspirators, an actionable wrong arose, giving rise to liability for the damages arising therefrom to plaintiff which consisted of the amount of commissions which plaintiff would otherwise have earned" (Id. at 304-305.).