Baker v. Gillan

• Decision Date: 09 April 1903
• Docket Number: 12,792
• Citation: 94 N.W. 615,68 Neb. 368
• Parties: OLON P. BAKER v. GEORGE K. GILLAN
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

94 N.W. 615

68 Neb. 368

OLON P. BAKER v. GEORGE K. GILLAN

No. 12,792

Supreme Court of Nebraska

April 9, 1903

ERROR to the district court for Fillmore county: GEORGE W. STUBBS DISTRICT JUDGE. Affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

Henry H. Wilson and Elmer W. Brown, for plaintiff in error.

John Barsby, contra.

OPINION

SULLIVAN, C. J.

This action was brought by Baker against Gillan to recover the sum of $ 100 claimed to be due as a land agent's commission. It appearing from the petition that the alleged contract of agency was not in writing, the court held that the facts pleaded did not constitute a cause of action and gave judgment on the merits in favor of the defendant.

The only question suggested by the petition in error and discussed in the briefs is whether an oral agreement like the one upon which plaintiff relies is valid and enforceable. The first section of the act of 1897 (Session Laws, 1897, p 304), is as follows: "Every contract for the sale of lands, between the owner thereof and any broker or agent employed to sell the same, shall be void, unless the contract is in writing and subscribed by the owner of the land and the broker or agent, and such contract shall describe the land to be sold, and set forth the compensation to be allowed by the owner in case of sale by the broker or agent." It is conceded that the case falls within the provisions of this section, and that if the law is constitutional the judgment is right. We think the law is constitutional, and that the argument in support of the claim that it is special legislation is obviously unsound. It is, of course, competent for the legislature to classify objects of legislation; and if the classification is reasonable, and not artificial or arbitrary, it will be upheld as a legitimate exercise of legislative power. The statute here considered is only a new instance of the exercise of that power. It may be that it is without exact precedent, but it has many familiar analogies in the legislation of this and other states. It is no more special legislation than are those provisions of the statute of frauds which require certain contracts to be evidenced by writing. It is in fact, a virtual extension or enlargement of the statute of frauds, and like that statute was designed to prevent the bringing of actions which experience had shown were often conceived in fraud and maintained by perjury. It purports to be, and it is, a general law; its...