Bennett v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Second Division; Guy Fulk, Judge; 1. Whether one acts as a broker or agent, his duty to the principal is the same, and the compensation, when not expressed, is the same. 42 N. E. 298; 47 N. E. 717. , Plaintiff, in order to recover, must show that he was defendant’s agent, and, as a condition precedent to such recovery, he must show a faithful discharge of his duties. He cannot advance his own interests at the expense of the principal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Second Division; Guy Fulk, Judge; 1. Whether one acts as a broker or agent, his duty to the principal is the same, and the compensation, when not expressed, is the same. 42 N. E. 298; 47 N. E. 717. , Plaintiff, in order to recover, must show that he was defendant’s agent, and, as a condition precedent to such recovery, he must show a faithful discharge of his duties. He cannot advance his own interests at the expense of the principal. Bad faith on the part of an agent or broker is a perfect defense to any action for commissions. 4 R. C. L., Brokers, No. 43;…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This is an action instituted by appellee against appellant to recover the amount of broker’s profit on a sale of real estate. Appellant owned a tract of land at Magazine, Arkansas, and authorized appellee to find a purchaser for her, which he did and reported the sale to her, but appellant refused to consummate the deal on the ground that appellee had deceived her by withholding information concerning the true amount of the agreed price, and appellee sues to recover the difference between the amount of the price which appellant agreed to accept for the land and the amount he was to receive…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hooper v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Little v. PhippsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. MulkeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Taylor v. GodboldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Boysen v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fike v. NewlinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
- Carnahan v. Lyman Real Estate CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Burton v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Davis v. Metcalf & HaleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Felhauer v. MilamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923