Harrison v. Brown
Decision Date | 03 March 1943 |
Docket Number | 102. |
Parties | HARRISON v. BROWN. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
This was an action by plaintiff as assignee of a real estate broker to recover for services in connection with the sale of certain real property by defendant receiver, under orders of court.
The defendant Brown is the duly appointed and acting receiver of the Blue Ridge Building & Loan Association, and as such is engaged in the liquidation of its assets, pursuant to the orders of the Superior Court. In the course of the receivership the following order was made by Presiding Judge Phillips, dated January 29, 1942:
By authority of this order, J.A. Carroll, a real estate broker was appointed to have charge of the sale of the real property of the Association in the hands of the receiver upon the terms specified, and in accordance with the court's instructions listed with all members of the real estate board the property at the prices fixed by the Advisory Committee. Thereafter, on February 11, 1942, Arthur A. York, a broker transmitted to Carroll the offer of one C.S. Badgett, in writing, to purchase the property in Asheville known as the Blue Ridge Building for the sum of $50,000 cash, the price fixed by the Advisory Committee, and, as evidence of good faith, to be applied on the purchase price, deposited $2,500. The offer was reported to the receiver. The receiver referred the offer to the Advisory Committee and was authorized and directed by the Committee to accept the offer and to sell the property for the price and on the terms set forth in the offer. Thereupon, on February 12, 1942, the receiver in writing accepted the offer, and the $2,500 was turned over to him. It was admitted in the pleadings that C.S. Badgett had authorized York to make the offer, and there was evidence that Badgett was worth $500,000, and owned real property in Asheville.
On March 6, 1942, J.A. Carroll assigned to the plaintiff the $1,000 commission alleged to be due him in connection with the sale of the property referred to, and in writing authorized the receiver to pay this amount to the plaintiff. This assignment was accepted by the receiver, in writing, as follows:
It further appeared from the pleadings offered in evidence by the plaintiff that the receiver prepared the papers necessary to convey title to C.S. Badgett, and tendered same and demanded payment of the balance of the purchase price, $47,500. Payment was refused. Thereafter, March 30, 1942, Arthur A. York petitioned the court to be allowed to withdraw the offer to purchase and to recover the $2,500 previously paid. The receiver filed answer to this petition and asked for specific performance of the contract of purchase and for the recovery of $47,500. The matter was heard May 14, 1942, by Judge Phillips, who entered the following order:
From this order the receiver did not appeal. Neither the plaintiff nor Carroll, his assignor, was made party to this proceeding or had notice thereof.
Plaintiff applied to the court for leave to bring an independent action against the receiver for the commission claimed, and this was allowed by order of court September 5, 1942. Pleadings were filed and the case was heard at December Term, 1942, of Buncombe Superior Court, at which term it was agreed that jury trial be waived, and that the court should hear the same, find the facts and state his conclusions of law. However, the defendant's motion for judgment of nonsuit made at the close of plaintiff's evidence and renewed at the close of all the testimony was allowed, and plaintiff's cause of action was nonsuited. The judgment recited: "It is therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed that the plaintiff's cause of action be and the same is hereby nonsuited, and the same is dismissed, and the plaintiff taxed with the costs thereof." There were no findings of fact or conclusions of law stated.
The plaintiff appealed.
Don C. Young, of Asheville, for appellant.
Jordan & Horner, of Asheville, for appellee.
The plaintiff was permitted by order of court to institute an independent action against the receiver to determine the validity of his claim. McIntosh, p. 1011. A jury trial having been waived, the trial judge could have found the facts with the force and effect of a jury verdict, and declared his conclusions of law arising thereon. The statute requires that when issues of fact are tried by the judge the...
To continue reading
Request your trial