Legal Opinion

Visic v. Paddock

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1963No. 7066PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHAVEZ, Justice.

This is an action by John Visic, Jr., d/b/a Valley Hi Realty, appellant, to recover a real estate commission from Carl R. Paddock and Essie Paddock, appellees.

Appellant is a licensed real estate broker. He prepared a written listing agreement for the sale of appellees’ motel which they signed on or about October 19, 1957. The listing agreement form was such that it could be used for either an exclusive right to sell or a nonexclusive right to sell. Prior to the time appellees executed the agreement, the form had been altered so that it provided for an exclusive right to sell.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lumpkins v. McPheeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Greene v. EsquibelNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Frear v. RobertsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Berrendo Irrigated Farms Co. v. JacobsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Paulos v. JanetakosNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Duke City Lumber Company, Inc. v. TerrelNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Terrel v. Duke City Lumber Company, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. Hockett v. WinksNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971
  4. McLean v. PaddockNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Prude v. LewisNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967

8 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