Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jacobs v. Rothschild

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 3, 1948No. 33031Published

1DissentCorn, J.

I think the majority opinion misconstrues the holding of this court in Gilliland v. Jaynes, 36 Okla. 563, 129 P. 8. It is being construed by the majority opinion as holding to secure “a purchaser who is ready, twilling and able to buy” or “to procure a written agreement to buy from the purchaser.”

In my judgment the opinion holds that in addition to the purchaser’s ability to buy, the broker must secure a written contract from him that can be enforced by the landowner as evidenced by Reynolds v. Anderson, 37 Okla. 368, 132 P. 322, in an opinion adopted within less than four months of the time…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Gilliland v. JaynesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Artlin Realty Co. v. GlassSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Littlefield v. BowenWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Schlegel v. FullerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. Reynolds v. AndersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913

4 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