Thompson v. Foster
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
The brokerage contract or listing here in suit does not purport to have conferred on the plaintiffs the exclusive right to sell the defendants’ property. Therefore, the legal principles involved will be stated and discussed, and should be interpreted, against that factual background. See 8 Am. Jur., Brokers, Sections 57 and 192.
Ordinarily, where property is listed with a broker for sale at a stipulated price, out of which the broker’s compensation is to be paid, and a sale is effected through the broker as a procuring cause, he is entitled to compensation, even though the final negotiations…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Scott v. Statesville Plywood & Veneer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Karr v. MoffettSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
- Lindsey v. . SpeightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- American Trust Co. v. GoodeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Martin v. . HollySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- S & W Realty & Bonded Commercial Agency, Inc. v. Duckworth & Shelton, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Peeler Insurance & Realty, Inc. v. HarmonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
- Property Shop, Inc. v. Mountain City Investment Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Aiken v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972