Legal Opinion

Rowland v. Kraft

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 9, 1924No. 14626PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The two contentions insisted upon by defendant in error are: (1) that, since the form of the sales ticket, approved by the defendant and under which the plaintiffs were authorized to operate, provided within itself for a binding contract for the sale of land, and contemplated signature by the defendant as owner as well as by the purchaser, it could not become operative as a basis for the recovery of commissions until after it had been signed by the defendant; and (2) that the terms of the approved sales ticket had been so altered *595by the proposed purchaser…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Curtis Land & Loan Co. v. Interior Land Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Humphries & Jackson v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  3. Monk v. McDanielSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  4. Winer v. Flournoy Realty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  5. Larned v. WentworthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Kraft v. Rowland & RowlandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
  2. Southeastern Realty Co. v. GriffinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
  3. Busbin v. Suburban Realty, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1976
  4. Suburban Realty, Inc. v. BusbinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
  5. Blount v. FreemanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956

1 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