Marcus & Millichap Investment Services of Chicago, Inc. v. Sekulovski

In action alleging that defendant-real estate agent fraudulently misrepresented work he and his partner contributed to various real estate transactions and misappropriated commissions when he terminated his relationship with plaintiff, Dist. Ct. did not err in limiting cross-examination of defendant’s partner, which, defendant claimed, would have demonstrated partner’s bias. Dist. Ct. allowed defendant to present evidence that partner was hostile to defendant, and Dist. Ct. could properly find that some proffered evidence had little probative value, while other proffered evidence constituted inadmissible hearsay. Moreover, with respect to defendant’s own claim that plaintiff owed him commissions under Ill. Wage Act, Dist. Ct. erred in granting plaintiff’s Rule 50(a) motion for judgment as matter of law when finding that defendant was independent contractor. However, any error was harmless where jury found that defendant was not owed any commissions at issue in his Wage Act claim.