Stuart-McKnight & Company v. Monroe

• Decision Date: 17 January 1928
• Citation: 222 Ky. 602
• Parties: Stuart-McKnight & Company v. Monroe.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

222 Ky. 602

Stuart-McKnight & Company v. Monroe.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Common Pleas Branch, First Division.

Decided January 17, 1928.

1. Brokers. — An oral contract of employment to find a purchaser for land is enforceable.

2. Appeal and Error. — In reviewing ruling of trial court sustaining demurrer to plaintiff's petition, Supreme Court must assume oral contract of employment of plaintiff to find purchaser for defendant's land as alleged in petition.

3. Pleading. — Exhibit filed with broker's petition in action for commissions on sale of farm held to sufficiently show contract between defendant and purchaser procured by plaintiff for sale of defendant's land.

4. Vendor and Purchaser. — That vendor inadvertently signed his name above instead of below line of acceptance in contract for sale of farm did not affect validity of instrument.

5. Brokers. — Where plaintiff, employed by defendant under oral contract to find purchaser for defendant's farm, found purchaser at satisfactory price, who made an acceptable contract of exchange with defendant for sale of property, plaintiff was entitled to commissions.

6. Vendor and Purchaser. — Sales contract describing land as "your" vendor's farm, containing 318 acres, and lying 2 1/2 miles northwest of La Grange, and which had upon it a mortgage of $13,100, sufficiently described land, since it was capable of identification although it might require additional evidence to locate and identify particular tract of land so described.

7. Brokers. — Broker could recover commission from vendor, where purchaser agreed to pay commissions on sale of his property, and written contract containing such provisions was accepted by vendor, since broker may represent both parties when that fact is known to each of them.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.

W.J. GOODWIN for appellant.

STITES & STITES for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE McCANDLESS.

Reversing.

Plaintiff, a real estate broker doing business under the firm name of Stuart-McKnight & Co., sued J.G. Monroe to recover brokerage commissions on the sale of a farm of 318 acres located 2 1/2 miles northwest of La Grange. It is substantially alleged in the petition that on the 9th of October, 1926, the defendant listed the above described land with plaintiff under a parol agreement to pay him the regular commissions allowed by the Louisville Real Estate Exchange in the event he found an acceptable purchaser for such farm at a price and upon terms satisfactory to the defendant; it being further alleged that within nine days after the property was so listed the plaintiff found and produced such purchaser in the person of J.H. Pile, who offered a price and terms that were satisfactory to defendant and which were accepted by him, and with whom the defendant entered into the following written contract:

"Louisville Title Company.

                         "No. 223 S. Fifth Street, between Market and
                                         Jefferson
                         "Telephone City 2553
                                      "Louisville, Ky., Oct. 18, 1926
                

"Stuart-McKnight & Company: I will take for my following described property in Louisville ____ x ____ feet, located on east side of Shawnee Terrace street, between ____ and ____ streets, with all improvements thereon and known as No. house No. 101 North and 111 South Shawnee Terrace street, in trade for your farm 318 acres more or less, the sum of ____ ($ ____) dollars, located 2 1/2 miles northwest of La Grange, Kentucky, also one-half interest in the present crop in accordance with contract respecting the crop. I will assume present mortgages on farm of the amount of $13,610.00. Mr. Monroe to assume mortgages on above two described houses of $5,300.00 and $5,200.00 respectively on above-described two houses. And will convey an unincumbered marketable title thereto by deed of general warranty, with the usual covenants such as the Louisville Title Company will insure, except all 1927 taxes which each party assumes and agrees to pay. Fire and tornado insurance now in effect to be assigned and transferred to respective transferees subject to the Joint Stock & Land Bank making loan of $11,000.00 on or before sixty days after date. I will pay the regular commission prescribed by the Real Estate Board of Louisville, Ky. This proposition is good for two (2) days from date.

                                      "(Signed) J.H. Pile
                                      "(Signed) J.G. Monroe.
                

"The above proposition is accepted this 18th day of October, 1926.

                                     ____________________________.
                                    "____________________________."
                

It is further alleged that the condition in the contract as to the obtention of a loan of $11,000 by J.H. Pile was arranged to the mutual satisfaction of both parties by the loan of $10,000 from the Land Bank and the loan of $1,000 by defendant secured by a mortgage on the farm. The value of the farm was $18,610, and the regular commission allowed by the Louisville Real Estate Board of Exchange is 5 per cent.; his commissions aggregating the sum of $930.50, for which he asked judgment. A demurrer was sustained to the petition, and, no amendment being offered, it was dismissed, and plaintiff appeals. The argument for appellee is, first, that the verbiage of the written agreement shows it to be a joint offer from J.H. Pile and J.G. Monroe to ...