Spears v. Carter
Decision Date | 17 February 1930 |
Citation | 24 S.W.2d 717,224 Mo.App. 726 |
Parties | JAMES SPEARS ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. JAMES L. CARTER, APPELLANT |
Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court of Jackson County.--Hon. Willard P. Hall Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Judgment affirmed.
Fairchild & Fulton and Nourse & Bell for respondents.
Kenneth W. Tapp for appellant.
Trimble, P. J., absent.
This is an action to recover a real estate broker's commission. Plaintiffs, a copartnership, were engaged in business as real estate brokers, under the firm name of Kansas Realty Company, having their office and principal place of business at Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Defendant is a resident of Jackson County, Missouri.
There seems to be no dispute as to the material facts in the case which may be stated briefly as follows: On September 3, 1925, defendant wrote the following letter to plaintiffs:
On September 11th, plaintiffs telegraphed defendant as follows:
To which defendant replied on the same date:
Thereafter plaintiffs sent the following message:
The sales agreements (in triplicate) mentioned in plaintiffs' telegram of September 14, 1925, were forwarded with the following letter:
On the bottom of the foregoing letter appears the following pen and ink notation:
The sales agreement referred to is rather long, but as its proper construction is the basis of this suit, we deem it best to set it out in full, as follows:
$ 600 Florida Sept. 12th, 1925.
"Received of E. D. Fox six hundred and no/100---Dollars, as a deposit for an option which, if accepted by the owner, is to apply as part payment on the purchase of the following property:
(Description of lots.)
The copies of this agreement, together with blank form of deed, were received by defendant, but he did not execute them. On September 25, 1925, plaintiffs wired defendant as follows:
To which defendant replied:
It is agreed that only the first line in the last mentioned telegram has any reference to the lots in issue in this case. On the same date defendant wrote plaintiffs the following letter:
On September 26th, plaintiffs wrote defendant:
It appears from the record that after waiting awhile plaintiffs tried to protect themselves and the alleged purchaser, Fox, by filing a lis pendens against the lots. Thereupon this suit was instituted.
The petition is more or less formal, and charges the listing by defendant of the lots in question at the price of $ 10,500 net to defendant; that within a few days after the real estate described in the petition was listed and placed with plaintiffs for sale, plaintiffs sold the property for the sum of $ 12,000 cash and sent defendant a telegram offering him the sum of $ 10,500 cash. The petition further alleges that pursuant to defendant's telegram accepting said sum of $ 10,500 cash, net to defendant, plaintiffs prepared sales agreements which they forwarded by mail to defendant at Kansas City Mo.; and that defendant failed, neglected and refused to sign said agreements and failed, neglected and refused to sell, transfer and convey the aforesaid real estate to the purchaser whom plaintiffs had procured who had agreed and was willing, able and ready to pay the sum of $ 12,000, for the real estate therein described. Judgment is asked in the sum of $ 1500, being the difference between $ 10,500 and $ 12,000, for which plaintiffs claim to have sold the property. Attached to the petition as exhibits are defendant's letter of September 3, 1925, listing the property for sale, and defendant's telegram of September 11, 1925, accepting the offer of sale at $ 10,500 and requiring a binder of $ 500, instead of $ 100 as contained in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Vondera v. Chapman
... ... given to the release as a whole. Thomas v. Utilities ... Bldg. Corp., 74 S.W.2d 578, 335 Mo. 900; Spears v ... Carter, 24 S.W.2d 717, 224 Mo.App. 726. So construed, it ... is apparent that the release was intended to cover only known ... injuries, ... ...
-
Webb-Boone Paving Co. v. State Highway Commission
... ... 205, 37 S.W.2d 505; ... Fulkerson v. Great Lakes Pipe Line Co., 335 Mo ... 1058, 75 S.W.2d 844; Holmes v. Freeman, 150 S.W.2d ... 557; Spears v. Carter, 224 Mo.App. 726, 24 S.W.2d ... 717; Seavy & Flarsheim Brokerage Co. v. Monarch Peanut ... Co., 241 S.W. 643; Campbell v. Snoddy, 215 ... ...
-
Bennett v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.
... ... Breweries, 247 Mo. 141, 152 S.W. 13; Allen v. Mo. P ... Ry., 294 S.W. 80; Krelitz v. Calcaterra (Mo.), ... 33 S.W.2d 909; Spears v. Carter, 224 Mo.App. 726, 24 ... S.W.2d 717; Houchins v. Hobbs (Mo. App.), 34 S.W.2d ... 167; King v. Frederick (Mo. App.), 43 S.W.2d 843; ... ...
-
Burns v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
... ... ___. (b) ... Plaintiff made a strong case even under the Illinois law ... Grand Lodge Locomotive Firemen v. Orrel, 206 Ill ... 208; Spears v. Carter, 224 Mo.App. 726, 24 S.W.2d ... 717; Ransford v. National Protective Ins. Ass'n, ... 16 S.W.2d 663; 6 R. C. L. 837-838. (2) ... ...