Garber v. Yeend
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
STAKELY, Justice.
There is no provision in the statutes, § 298 et seq., Title 46, Code of 1940, requiring a real estate broker suing for commissions to allege and prove that he is licensed. Such a provision does appear in the statutes of some other states. Obviously, decisions in those states, construing the statute, are not persuasive here. We agree that the failure of the real estate agent to procure a license is a defense which must be proved by the defendant, where it is not disclosed by the testimony of the plaintiff. Knight v. Watson, 221 Ala. 69, 127 So. 841; Marx v. Lining, 231 Ala.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Marx v. LiningSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Knight v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Shearin v. PizitzSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Wood v. Traders' Securities Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1930
3Cited by1 opinion
- Merchants Nat. Bank of Mobile v. CotnamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948