Legal Opinion
Kemmerer v. Roscher
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 5, 1960PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Defendant contends that the “exclusive listing” contract is completely void and no recovery can be had upon it.
Upon these facts, if plaintiffs are barred from recovery upon this exclusive listing contract it must be as a result of statutes restricting the activities and the rights which, as brokers, they would otherwise have. Statutes pertinent to the cause are:
“136.02 Brokers and salesmen licensed. No person shall engage in or follow the business or occupation of, or advertise or hold himself out as or act temporarily or otherwise as a real-estate broker or salesman or cemetery salesman or…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Payne v. VolkmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Levy v. BirnscheinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
3Cited by13 opinions
- Dow & Condon, Inc. v. Brookfield Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Thorpe v. CarteCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
- Greenlee v. Rainbow Auction/Realty Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1996
- George Nangen & Co. v. Kenosha Auto Transport Corp.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1965
- Miller Nationwide Real Estate Corp. v. Sikeston Motel Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1967
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.