Legal Opinion

Russell v. Smith

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided June 30, 1995No. 94 CA 1875PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

IzWILLIAM V. REDMANN, Judge Pro Tern.

Defendant homeowners appeal a judgment awarding plaintiff real estate brokers a commission on a buy-sell agreement for defendants’ Amite home, which the buyer refused to perform because one of four lawyers consulted (none of whom testified) deemed the title unmerchantable.

We reverse. Defendants owe a commission only if their title was not merchantable, or they otherwise prevented the sale. Plaintiffs did not prove either such case.

Weldon Russell (sometimes hereafter “plaintiff’2) had in the past acted as real estate agent on “three or four” successive…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Tullier v. TullierSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1985
  2. Guy L. Deano, Inc. v. MichelSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1938
  3. James M. Vardaman & Co., Inc. v. PonderLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1983
  4. Farrier v. GuilloryLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1977
  5. Gertrude Gardner, Inc. v. CampoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1982

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brafa v. ChristLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2005
  2. Tammy Brafa D/B/A Magnolia Group Realty v. Charles J. Christ, Et Ux.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API