C. Buck Bush Realty Co. v. Whetstone
| Decision Date | 19 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 46736,46736 |
| Citation | 266 So.2d 135 |
| Parties | C. BUCK BUSH REALTY COMPANY v. Wilbur Lee WHETSTONE. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Paul G. Alexander, William R. Barnett, Jackson, for appellant.
Stennett, Wilkinson & Ward, James A. Peden, Jr., Jackson, for appellee.
This is an appeal by C. Buck Bush Realty Company from a judgment of the Gircuit Court of Hinds County reversing a judgment of the county court wherein appellant was awarded a judgment against appellee Wilber Lee Whetstone for $1,688. We reverse and reinstate the judgment of the county court.
The record in this case reflects that on Saturday, November 28, 1970, appellee Whetstone entered into an 'exclusive listing contract' with appellant, acting through Hardy Hayes, its agent, whereby appellant was given the exclusive right as agent for the appellee to sell a house and lot located at 1422 Wooddell Drive in the City of Jackson, for the price of $27,300. The property was the homestead of the Whetstones, but Mr. Whetstone's wife did not sign the agreement. Hayes was aware that Mr. and Mrs. Charles Crabtree were in the market for a home and he contacted them. On the following day, Sunday, November 29, Hayes showed the home to the Crabtrees who agreed to buy it on the terms suitable to the Whetstones. The parties reduced their agreement to writing and signed the contract on that day although it was dated November 30, 1970. The Crabtrees put up $500 as earnest money to guarantee that they would carry out their part of the contract. Mr. Whetstone authorized Hayes to secure an attorney to prepare the necessary papers to close the deal for him. The papers were prepared, and two days before the date set for the closing of the deal, Whestone notified Hayes that he was not going to sell the property. Hayes advised Whetstone that he expected him to pay the commission provided for in the contract and to pay the attorney's fee in the amount of $50. This Mr. Whetstone refused to do.
Appellant then brought suit against Mr. and Mrs. Whetstone seeking to recover the commission provided for in the listing agreement and alleged in the declaration that it was a licensed real estate broker, that it had negotiated the sale of the Whetstone property, and that the owner agreed to pay a regular real estate commission of six percent of the gross sales price. It was also alleged that although the real estate company had fully performed its part of the contract by finding a purchaser, the Whetstones refused to sell their property in accordance with their contract. It was alleged that Mr. Whestone had authorized the realty company to employ an attorney for him and that he was liable for the attorney's fee in the amount of $50.
The defendants answered the declaration denying they were liable to the realty company in any amount. It was affirmatively charged that the contract which they had signed to sell their homestead to the Crabtrees was void for the reason that it was entered into on Sunday. It was also affirmatively charged that the exclusive listing agreement signed by Mr. Whetstone was also void because it involved their homestead and it was not signed by Mrs. Whetstone.
The case was tried before the county court without a jury, and the court found that Mr. Whetstone was liable for the commission, although the exclusive listing agreement was not signed by his wife. It was also the opinion of the court that the realty company had procured a buyer who stood ready, willing and able to purchase the property on terms provided for in the listing agreement. It also held that the contract between the Whetstones and the Crabtrees was not enforceable but was evidence that appellant had performed its part of the agreement by finding a ready, willing and able purchaser. The judgment was entered against Mr. Whetstone alone in the amount of $1,688.
Upon appeal to the circuit court that court reversed the county court, holding that the exclusive listing agreement between the realty company and Mr. Whetstone was void because it was an agreement to sell the homestead and was not signed by the wife, who was under no disability. The court also held that the contract between the Whetstones and the Crabtrees was void because it was entered into on Sunday. The court held that no obligation to pay a real estate commission could arise out of two illegal contracts.
The principal question to be determined is whether appellant is entitled to its commission, although appellee's wife did not sign the 'exclusive listing agreement' involving homestead property.
The contract between appellant and appellee whereby appellee constituted appellant his agent to sell the property for the stipulated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harper v. State, 52354
...v. W. T. Rawleigh Co., 222 Miss. 21, 75 So.2d 78 (1954); Foster v. Wooten, 67 Miss. 540, 7 So. 501 (1890). In C. Buck Bush Realty Co. v. Whetstone, 266 So.2d 135 (Miss.1972), the defendant attempted to have a Sunday-dated contract made through his broker declared void, but we held that abse......
-
Varner Real Estate, Inc. v. Bobb, 55636
...ready, willing and able to buy, even though the owner may then decline to sell. 20 So.2d at 78. See also, C. Buck Bush Realty v. Whetstone, 266 So.2d 135 (Miss.1972). The fact that the seller could not convey the land he employed Varner Real Estate to sell does not avoid his obligation to p......
-
Jordan v. First National Bank of Jackson, 52786
...1111) The appellee argues that a realty commission is the liability only of the owner of property. However, in C. Buck Bush Realty Co. v. Whetstone, 266 So.2d 135 (Miss.1972), this Court As a general rule a person employing a broker to find a purchaser for property is liable to the broker f......