Edwards v. Pike

• Decision Date: 30 January 1908
• Citation: 107 S.W. 586
• Parties: EDWARDS v. PIKE et al.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

107 S.W. 586

EDWARDS v. PIKE et al.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

January 30, 1908.

Rehearing Denied February 20, 1908.

Appeal from Red River County Court; J. M. Deaver, Judge.

Action by Ed. Edwards against A. N. Pike and others for broker's commissions. From a judgment of the county court reversing a judgment of the justice court for plaintiff he appeals. Affirmed.

George Trice, for appellant. Lennox & Lennox and W. W. Johnson, for appellees.

WILLSON, C. J.

A. N. Pike owned 143 acres of land in Red River county which he wished to sell. Appellant was a real estate agent doing business in Clarksville. The Tayloe-Butcher Realty Company also was a real estate agent doing business in the same town. Each was authorized by said Pike as such an agent to effect a sale of the land for him. Each knew that the other was so authorized. The realty company advertised in the Dallas News that it had lands in Red River county for sale. One Kluttz, who lived in Rockwall county, read the advertisement, began a correspondence with the realty company about the lands advertised, and finally went in person to Clarksville to see them or about them. A representative of the realty company met him and spent nearly all of a day showing him lands the company had for sale, but did not then show him Pike's land. Kluttz wanted sandy prairie land, and none of those shown him were satisfactory. The parties made an engagement to go and look at other lands on the next day, when the representative of the realty company expected to show Kluttz the Pike land. In the meantime Kluttz met Edwards, and, as a result of information Edwards gave him about the Pike land, canceled his engagement with the realty company, and went with Edwards to see it. He was there introduced to Pike, the owner, who was informed that he was a prospective purchaser of the land, and discussed with Pike the matter of renting to him the land for the following year in the event he (Kluttz) became the purchaser thereof. The evidence is conflicting as to the details and result of the negotiations which followed between Edwards and Kluttz. Kluttz testified that Edwards proposed to sell him the entire 143 acres at $25 per acre, which proposition he declined; that he then offered Edwards $25 per acre for 100 acres of the land; that Edwards refused to sell him the 100 acres for the price offered until he had had an opportunity to consult with the owner thereof; that he replied to this suggestion that he wait until Edwards could see the owner; that he had not time to wait; and that there the negotiations between them ceased. Edwards testified that he offered the entire tract of 143 acres to Kluttz at $20 per acre; that Kluttz declined this offer, and proposed to give $25 per acre for 100 acres off the east end of the tract; that he, Edwards, replied to this proposition that, if he would agree to have the 100 acres so cut off the east end as to leave Pike one of the houses, he would accept the proposition; that Kluttz so agreed; that he, Edwards, then proposed that they reduce their agreement to writing and put up a forfeit to enforce it; that Kluttz declined to do this, stating that he would first have to return to Rockwall county, and see what disposition he could make of some property he had there; and that they parted with the understanding that Kluttz would be back on Tuesday of the following week, when the trade would be closed. Edwards reported to J. A. Pike, the father of A. N. Pike, and fully authorized to act for him in all matters connected with the sale of the land, that he had found a purchaser for the land who in a few days would close the trade. In the meantime the realty company advised J. A. Pike that it had found a party willing to give $25 per acre for 100 acres off the east end of the tract. The realty company was then informed that Edwards had a man willing to buy on similar terms, and its representative was asked by J. A. Pike if the company's and Edwards' purchaser were one and the same person. The reply was, "No; I reckon not." On Wednesday of the following week, according to the testimony of J. A. Pike, Butcher, representing the realty company, came to him with a letter from a party proposing to buy the land land. J. A. Pike thereupon went to Edwards, and stated to him that the realty company had a man who might buy the land, when he was told by Edwards not to wait on his man, but to go ahead and trade through the realty company, as his man, who was to have returned the day before, might not come back. He (Pike) then told the realty company that Edwards' man had not come back, and to go ahead and close up the trade with the buyer it had found. By the terms of the sale made by the realty company the 100 acres was to be so surveyed as to include both houses. After the trade verbally had been closed with Kluttz through the realty company, but before the contract of sale had been reduced to writing and a forfeit put up, A. N. Pike, the owner of the land, was informed by Edwards that Kluttz was the man he had sold the land to, that he claimed he was entitled to the commission of 5 per cent. agreed upon, and expected, if he (Pike) closed the deal through the realty company and paid the commission to it, to sue him. A. N. Pike notwithstanding closed the trade through the realty company, and permitted them to retain out of the purchase price 5 per cent., or $125, as the commission for making the sale. Appellant's suit was commenced in a justice's court in Red River county, where he recovered a judgment for $125, interest, and costs against A. N. Pike, who on his cross-action against the Tayloe-Butcher Realty Company, made a party at his instance, recovered a like judgment against said realty company. In the county court, on an appeal prosecuted by the realty company, a judgment was rendered July 24, 1907, that appellant take nothing by his suit against A. N. Pike, and that the latter take nothing by his cross-action...