Legal Opinion

DiTommaso Realty, Inc. v. Moak Motorcycles, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1990No. CC 86-6-84; CA A45797; SC S36225PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*192JONES, J.

The issue in this case is whether a contractual clause, providing that a real estate broker shall receive 10 percent of the selling price no matter who actually sells the property, was an unenforceable liquidated damages provision. We hold that the provision was not for liquidated damages but was an independent, valid contractual promise.

Plaintiff sought recovery for a contract debt, not for liquidated damages. Defendant claimed that the clause in dispute in the real estate contract was for liquidated damages. Defendant appealed a judgment awarding plaintiff, a real estate broker,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Illingworth v. BushongOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Medak v. HekimianOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Wright v. Schutt Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Baumgartner v. MeekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Dean Vincent, Inc. v. McDonoughOregon Supreme Court · 1978

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Tupper v. RoanOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Kesterson v. JuhlCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. Emmert Industrial Corp. v. SandersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  4. Martin Bros. Signs, Inc. v. ViceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  5. Allstream Business US, LLC v. Carrier Network Solutions, LLCDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2021

7 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