Brown v. Grimm
Decision Date | 24 February 1971 |
Citation | 481 P.2d 63,258 Or. 55 |
Parties | Winifred G. BROWN, dba Garden Home Real Estate, Appellant, v. Duane E. GRIMM and Helen L. Grimm, husband and wife, Respondents. |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Glenn H. Prohaska, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Carlton R. Reiter, and Reiter, Day, Wall & Bricker, Portland.
Frederick A. Anderson, Tigard, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Anderson & Dittman, Tigard.
Before O'CONNELL, C.J., * and DENECKE, TONGUE, and BRYSON, JJ.
This is an action at law by plaintiff, a real estate broker, against defendants, husband and wife, to recover a broker's commission in the amount of $2,000 and attorney fees, based on a Real Estate Broker's Employment Contract signed by defendants and R. Timmins, a real estate saleswoman employed by plaintiff. The commission is claimed to have been earned by plaintiff's procuring, through Timmins, a purchaser for defendants' property listed with plaintiff under an exclusive listing agreement.
Defendants denied the allegations of plaintiff's complaint and affirmatively alleged fraudulent misrepresentation and a breach of fiduciary duties on the part of plaintiff. The case was tried before the court without a jury. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment in favor of the defendants.
The relevant parts of the Real Estate Broker's Employment Contract, on which this action is based, are as follows:
The plaintiff's first assignment of error is that "the court erred in failing to find that plaintiff was entitled to a real estate broker's commission," contending that a real estate broker earns a commission when he places the seller and buyer together and an enforceable contract of sale is executed, relying upon Harris v. Coomler, 250 Or. 594, 443 P.2d 637 (1968); Killam v. Tenney, 229 Or. 134, 366 P.2d 739 (1961); and DeHarpport v. Green, 215 Or. 281, 333 P.2d 900 (1959).
The above employment contract provides:
" * * * In the event you * * * shall find a buyer ready and willing to enter into a deal for said price and terms * * * I hereby agree to pay you in cash * * * a commission equal in amount to 10% of said selling price * * *."
In Martin v. Clinton, 239 Or. 541, 542, 398 P.2d 742 (1965), this court held:
The official Earnest Money Agreement which plaintiff had defendants and the prospective purchaser, Guillory, execute, provided:
The record in this case is virtually barren of any evidence that the purported purchaser, Guillory, was either able or willing to pay the defendants $22,000 cash for their property during the life of the Broker's Employment Contract. The evidence indicates that Guillory was not willing to pay until January 1969 at the earliest. There was no evidence offered of his financial ability to pay, and Guillory testified that he had obtained only verbal interest in financing the proposed transaction that the defendants' property was to have become part of.
In DeHarpport v. Green, 215 Or. 281, 284, 333 P.2d 900, 902 (1959), this court held:
There was no request for special findings of fact and the court entered the following general Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
and thereafter entered judgment accordingly. There was sufficient evidence to support the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
In the recent case of Setser v. Commonwealth, Inc., 90 Or.Adv.Sh. 1463, 470 P.2d 142, 145 (1970), a similar case involving an action to recover a broker's commission for producing a purchaser of property owned by the defendant, this court stated:
The leading case in the United States adopting this point of view is Ellsworth Dobbs, Inc. v. Johnson, 50 N.J. 528, 236 A.2d 843, 30 A.L.R.3d 1370 (1967). 2
In that case the prospective purchaser had entered into a contract of purchase with the owner but did not complete the contract because he was financially unable to do so. The court said:
" " 50 N.J. at 548, 236 A.2d at 853.
The Court then laid down the following rule:
" ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gaynor v. Laverdure
...Inc. v. Johnson. Rogers v. Hendrix, 92 Idaho 141, 438 P.2d 653. Setser v. Commonwealth, Inc., 256 Or. 11, 470 P.2d 142. Brown v. Grimm, 258 Or. 55 481 P.2d 63; Staab v. Messier, 128 Vt. 380, 264 A.2d 790. See Taylor Real Estate & Ins. Co. v. Greene, 274 Ala. 694, 151 So.2d 397; Sweet v. H. ......
-
Wright v. Schutt Const. Co.
...the seller comes into existence only when his buyer performs in accordance with the contract of sale." More recently, in Brown v. Grimm, 258 Or. 55, 481 P.2d 63 (1971), we approved this same In Brady v. E. Portland Sheet Metal Wks., 222 Or. 584, 352 P.2d 144 (1960), a real estate broker bro......
-
Record Realty, Inc. v. Hull
...all conditions precedent to the duty of the seller to pay, including the condition that he has produced an 'able' buyer. Brown v. Grimm, 258 Or. 55, 481 P.2d 63 (1971); Henry Broderick, Inc. v. Baker, 151 Wash. 1, 274 P. 722 (1929). The broker submits that the record establishes 'sufficient......
-
Tristram's Landing, Inc. v. Wait
...Oregon have adopted the Ellsworth rule in its entirety. See Winkelman v. Allen, 214 Kansas 22, 519 P.2d 1377 (1974); Brown v. Grimm, 258 Or. 55, 59--61, 481 P.2d 63 (1971). Additionally, Vermont, Connecticut and Idaho have cited the case with approval. See also Potter v. Ridge Realty Corp.,......