Marr-Piper Co. v. Bullis
Decision Date | 11 January 1928 |
Docket Number | (No. 861-4951.) |
Citation | 1 S.W.2d 572 |
Parties | MARR-PIPER CO. v. BULLIS et al.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by the Marr-Piper Company against Josephine W. Bullis and another, in which the named defendant sought judgment over against defendant Frank Alderete. Judgment for plaintiff and for defendant Bullis against defendant Alderete was reversed and rendered in favor of Bullis and remanded as to Alderete by the Court of Civil Appeals (296 S. W. 624), and plaintiff and defendant Alderete bring error. Judgment of Court of Civil Appeals reversed, and that of trial court affirmed.
John T. Hill, of El Paso, for plaintiffs in error.
John B. Howard, James R. Harper, and Goggin, Hunter & Brown, all of El Paso, and Guy S. McFarland, of San Antonio, for defendants in error.
This suit was instituted by Marr-Piper Company, a copartnership engaged in business as real estate brokers, against Mrs. Josephine W. Bullis and Frank G. Alderete, to recover commissions upon a sale of real estate belonging to Mrs. Bullis in the city of El Paso. Mrs. Bullis was sued upon an implied contract to pay such commissions, and the defendant Alderete, who was the purchaser of the property, was sued upon his agreement with Mrs. Bullis at the purchase that he would pay any commissions that would be due. Mrs. Bullis also sought judgment over against Alderete upon his promise to protect her. The plaintiffs recovered according to their prayer, and Mrs. Bullis likewise recovered over against Alderete. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment and rendered judgment in favor of Mrs. Bullis, but remanded the cause as to the defendant Alderete. 296 S. W. 624. Writs of error have been granted both to Marr-Piper Company and Alderete.
The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals as to Mrs. Bullis was predicated upon its conclusion that there was "no evidence in the record establishing an acceptance on the part of Mrs. Bullis of the offer of appellee to sell her property for a commission, and in fact the evidence indicates, if anything, her unwillingness to do so." The evidence bearing upon the issue of implied contract is made up, for the most part, of correspondence between the parties, and is set out by the Court of Civil Appeals as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jonibach Mgmt. Trust v. Wartburg Enters., Inc.
...fact and has been recognized in Texas prior to the enactment of the Texas version of the UCC), citing Marr–Piper Co. v. Bullis, 1 S.W.2d 572, 575 (Tex. Comm.App.1928, judgment adopted) ("A contract implied in fact is one in which, under the circumstances, the acts of the parties are such as......
-
Kadane v. Clark
...is procured by the broker and a sale is made to him by the owner. Dockery v. Maple, Tex.Civ.App., 125 S. W. 631. In Marr-Piper Co. v. Bullis, Tex.Com. App., 1 S.W.2d 572, it was held that whether the property had been previously listed with the broker or not, if the purchaser was voluntaril......
-
Shahan-Taylor Co. v. Foremost Dairies
...proved the necessary elements for an implied sales agreement supporting appellant's claim against appellee Hoover. Marr-Piper Co. v. Bullis, Tex.Com.App., 1 S.W.2d 572; McDonald v. William Cameron & Co., Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 1065; Johnson v. Gattegno, Tex.Civ.App., 267 S.W. 740; Masterso......
-
Dallas Joint Stock Land Bank of Dallas v. Magee
... ... Gouldy, Tex.Civ.App., 239 S.W. 364; Toland v. Williams & Wiley, Tex.Civ. App., 129 S.W. 392; Wilson v. Sears, Tex. Civ.App., 166 S.W. 38; Marr-Piper Co. v. Bullis, Tex.Com.App., 1 S.W.2d 572. And if Magee performed the contract by finding a purchaser who was ready, able and willing to buy at the ... ...