Legal Opinion

Bishop v. Hansen

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided March 5, 2001No. 45471-4-IPublished

1Opinion of the Court

Becker, A.C. J.

To satisfy the statute of frauds for a real estate brokerage agreement, the written agreement must specify how the broker is to be paid. If the broker is to receive a commission based on the sales price of the property, the listing price is not a necessary term and its absence will not invalidate the agreement.

Appellants Elsie and James Hansen entered into an exclusive real estate listing agreement with Roy Bishop, a real estate broker. The listing agreement, written on a form contract, stated that Bishop would have the “sole and exclusive right” to submit offers to purchase…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wilson v. SteinbachWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Kruse v. HempWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Maybury v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Central Idaho Agency, Inc. v. TurnerIdaho Supreme Court · 1968

3 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