Cannon v. Staples
| Decision Date | 16 January 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 5922.,5922. |
| Citation | 127 A. 145 |
| Parties | CANNON v. STAPLES. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Hugh B. Baker, Judge.
Action on the case in assumpsit by Raymond B. Cannon against Anna G. Staples, executrix. Verdict for plaintiff directed and defendant excepts. Exceptions overruled and case remitted, with directions to enter judgment for plaintiff.
Thomas F. Black, Jr., of Providence, for plaintiff.
Benjamin W. Grim, of Providence, for defendant.
This action on the case in assumpsit is brought to recover $400 for services rendered Charles A. Staples in procuring a purchaser for some of his real estate. At the conclusion of the plaintiff's testimony the defendant's attorney stated that the defendant had no testimony to offer. Each party asked for a directed verdict. The trial justice directed a verdict for the plaintiff. The defendant has brought the case to this court by her bill of exceptions, claiming that the verdict should have been directed for her.
It appears in the plaintiff's testimony that Mr. Staples engaged him to sell some of his real estate; that he submitted an offer from a prospective purchaser, which was accepted by Mr. Staples on condition that he would reduce his commission to $400; that he agreed to accept the reduced commission; and that an agreement for the sale and purchase of the real estate was then signed by Mr. Staples and the prospective purchaser. Two hundred dollars on account of the purchase price was paid to Mr. Staples at the time he signed the agreement. The agreement was dated October 5, 1922, and Mr. Staples agreed to convey the real estate described therein by warranty deed on or before 60 days from date. The last paragraph in the agreement states that it is understood that the broker's commission was to be paid by Mr. Staples upon the passing of the deed. Mr. Staples died October 15, 1922, without executing the deed. The defendant claims that Mr. Staples' estate is not bound to pay the commission as the contract was never consummated. It was admitted that plaintiff duly filed his claim against the estate of Mr. Staples in the probate court, and that it was disallowed by the defendant.
In the absence of a special contract the production of a purchaser able, willing, and ready to purchase on terms satisfactory to the seller entitles the broker to his commission. Peckbam v. Ashhurst, 18 R. I. 376, 28 A. 337. In Rice v. Mayo, 107 Mass. 550, it was held that:
"A written contract for the purchase of an estate, binding both vendor and purchaser, is a sale within the meaning of an agreement to pay a commission to a broker upon sale of the estate."
See, also, Roche v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chasse v. Newark Ins. Co.
...a verdict should not be directed for a defendant, if on any reasonable view of the evidence, the plaintiff can recover. Cannon v. Staples, 46 R.I. 301, 127 A. 145. As the court said in Morrarty v. Reali, 100 R.I. 689, 695, 219 A.2d 404, 'On a motion for directed verdict, the trial justice m......
-
Wartell v. Novograd
...acts and statements is not entirely satisfactory or clear, but interpreting it most favorably to plaintiff, as we must do (Cannon v. Staples, 46 R. I. 300, 127 A. 145; Baynes v. Billings, 30 R. I. 53, 58, 73 A. 625), it may be claimed to show that defendant had paid the first and second mor......
-
Bines v. United Elec. Rys. Co.
...A. 639; Dart v. R. I. H. Tr. Co., 45 R. I. 173, 121 A. 211; Jacobs v. United Electric Rys. Co., 46 R. I. 230, 125 A. 286; Cannon v. Staples, 46 R. I. 300, 127 A. 145. In this case it appears in evidence that January 6, 1923, plaintiff was a passenger on one of defendant's electric cars oper......
-
Gettler v. Caffier, 10046
...terms specifically prescribing what shall constitute performance thereunder. Gallagher v. Paris, 53 R.I. 186, 165 A. 360; Cannon v. Staples, 46 R.I. 300, 127 A. 145. The transcript reveals a conflict in the evidence relating to the nature and the terms of the contract. The defendant wife te......