Legal Opinion

Allison v. Fuller-Smith & Co.

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided July 22, 1924No. 6 Div. 433PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBricken, P. J.

The contract upon which plaintiff sues, as declared in counts 3 and 4, is one of brokerage only.

A real estate broker, strictly speaking, is but a middleman, whose office it is to, bring the principals together, with the understanding that they are to negotiate with each other, and trade upon such terms as may be mutually satisfactory. Handley et al. v. Schaffer, 177 Ala. 636, 59 So. 286; Stout v. Thornhill, 16 Ala. App. 480, 79 So. 154.

If it should be conceded that counts 3 and 4 are defective for failing to aver “a performance of the contract by plaintiff pursuant to or in accordance with…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Handley v. ShafferSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  2. Moore v. HeinekeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  3. Torrey v. BurneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
  4. Britton v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1917
  5. Goldstein v. LeakeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1903

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Opelika Montgomery Fair Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951
  2. Felder v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Louisville N. R. Co. v. NolenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  4. Henry v. StablerAlabama Court of Appeals · 1934
  5. Ex Parte AllisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API