McGillivray v. Nielson, 30423.
| Decision Date | 22 April 1948 |
| Docket Number | 30423. |
| Citation | 192 P.2d 369,30 Wn.2d 589 |
| Parties | McGILLIVRAY v. NIELSON et al. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1
Action by D. J. McGillivray against Albert L. Nielson and the community composed of Albert L. Nielson and Jane Doe Nielson his wife, to recover a commission allegedly due under an exclusive real estate listing contract. From the judgment defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Appeal from Superior Court, Lincoln County; W. Lon Johnson, judge.
Garvin & Frissell, of Spokane, for appellants.
John D McGillivray, of Spokane for respondent.
On December 26, 1945, the appellants, being the owners of farm land in Lincoln county, went to the office of the respondent a licensed real estate broker, in Spokane, for the express purpose of listing their property with him for sale. During the discussion in the office, all the terms and conditions of the proposed listing contract were fully gone into and were at the time expressly approved by the appellant wife. She left the office Before the listing contract was prepared, but with full knowledge that her husband would sign the agreement containing the terms and conditions which had been discussed and to all of which she had expressly agreed and in which she concurred. The listing contract was signed by the appellant husband, and he thereafter advised the appellant wife that he had signed the listing contract, and his action in doing so was thereupon approved by her.
By the terms of the contract, the purchase price was to be thirty-six thousand dollars, the down payment twelve thousand dollars, and the respondent was appointed exclusive agent for the sale of the property until July 1, 1946; and it was further provided that, on the respondent's securing a purchaser able and willing to purchase said property on the terms and conditions set forth in the contract, the appellants would pay him a commission of fifteen hundred dollars.
The respondent immediately commenced advertising the property for sale and sent at least twenty to twenty-five prospective purchasers to see the property.
On April 16, 1946, appellant Albert L. Nielson wrote the following letter to the respondent:
On May 13, 1946, the appellants and respondent met in the latter's office with Russell A. Lawson and Lawrence Lawson, and at that time Lawrence Lawson signed an agreement whereby he agreed to purchase the property upon the terms and conditions set forth in the listing contract. Lawson was ready, willing, and financially able to purchase the property upon those terms and conditions. The appellants refused to sell the property to Lawson and the respondent sued to recoved his commission of fifteen hundred dollars, and from a judgment in his favor this appeal is taken.
All of the facts hereinabove set forth have been taken almost verbatim from an agreed statement of facts and from the exhibits.
There is considerable argument in the briefs as to the rights of the parties to such a listing agreement when it is terminated without good cause Before a sale has actually been made. We do not pass upon those questions, because we...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Stout
...the nonsigning spouse approves the transaction. Compare Whiting v. Johnson, 64 Wash.2d 135, 390 P.2d 985 (1964); McGillivray v. Nielson, 30 Wash.2d 589, 192 P.2d 369 (1948); Colorado Nat'l Bank v. Merlino, 35 Wash.App. 610, 616-17, 668 P.2d 1304 (1983); Daily v. Warren, 16 Wash.App. 726, 55......
-
Whiting v. Johnson
...P.2d 397; Bowman v. Hardgrove, 200 Wash. 78, 93 P.2d 303; In re Horse Heaven Irr. Dist., 19 Wash.2d 89, 141 P.2d 400; McGillivray v. Nielson, 30 Wash.2d 589, 192 P.2d 369. Two alternate inquiries thus present themselves: (1) Did Mrs. Johnson expressly or by implication authorize or consent ......