Fickling Properties, Inc. v. Smith

• Citation: 123 Fla. 556,167 So. 42
• Parties: FICKLING PROPERTIES, Inc., et al. v. SMITH et al.
• Decision Date: 30 March 1936
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Florida

167 So. 42

123 Fla. 556

FICKLING PROPERTIES, Inc., et al. v. SMITH et al.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

March 30, 1936

Suit by Jessie C. Smith, joined by her husband, Lorrain G. Smith and others, against the Fickling Properties, Inc., and others. From an adverse decree, defendants appeal.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; H. F Atkinson, Judge.

COUNSEL

John J Lindsey and William A. Lane, both of Miami, for appellants.

J. E Yonge and Garland M. Budd, Jr., both of Miami, for appellees.

OPINION

DAVIS Justice.

Fickling Properties, Inc., was a Florida corporation engaged in the real estate brokerage business. Rockville Properties, Inc. was a separate corporation engaged in the business of buying and selling lands. One W. I. Fickling was president and principal stockholder in each of the several corporations. It was Fickling who conducted on behalf of each of the corporations the business transactions herein brought into controversy.

The chancellor below, in deciding this case against the appellants, held in effect that the two corporations, Fickling Properties, Inc., and Rockville Properties, Inc., were so closely related with reference to the real estate deal complained of in this suit that they should be regarded in equity as but one corporation. And upon the basis of that finding the chancellor required the Rockville Properties, Inc., to convey to the plaintiff below, Jessie C. Smith, all of its interest in certain properties that it was alleged had become vested in said Rockville Properties, Inc., through an alleged betrayal of trust on the part of Fickling Properties, Inc., in not purchasing same for Smith's benefit pursuant to an agency and brokerage contract entered into between Fickling Properties, Inc., and said Smith, to that end and so providing.

There was substantial evidence in this case to show that appellee Jessie C. Smith had employed and commissioned Fickling Properties, Inc., as her agent and broker to 'secure prices' on certain lots she was desirous of buying, if possible, through the corporate agency of a real estate broker; that Mr. Smith put up with the broker a binder deposit to that end and looked to Fickling Properties, Inc. to represent her in the contemplated deal which anticipated the purchase of certain real estate on Di Lido Island, a restricted residential subdivision in Biscayne Bay; that subsequent thereto the identical property Mrs. Smith expected to purchase through Fickling Properties, Inc., was purchased from its owner, Page Securities Corporation, by Rockville Properties, Inc., at the instance of the same W. I. Fickling, who was the principal individual in Fickling Properties, Inc., and largely in charge of its affairs; that thereafter Fickling Properties, Inc., attempted to so handle the matter with its principal, Mrs. Smith, as to charge her $3,000 for the property, whereas the property itself had already been acquired by Rockville Properties, Inc., for $2,500 that, when confronted with a demand for a deed to the property, Fickling advanced the contention that, while he had purchased the property in question for $2,500, he had not done so as agent for Fickling Properties, Inc., the broker for Mrs. Smith, but that he had acted in the premises...