Carr v. Ubsdell
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — No». John A. Tatty, Judge. (1) The plaintiff was the agent of Dodd but sues to recover for services rendered in the transaction to Ubsdell. The case is therefore one of double agency, and the contract upon which it was based is wholly void. Chapman v. Currie, 51 Mo. App. 40; DeSteiger v. Hollington, 17 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — No». John A. Tatty, Judge. (1) The plaintiff was the agent of Dodd but sues to recover for services rendered in the transaction to Ubsdell. The case is therefore one of double agency, and the contract upon which it was based is wholly void. Chapman v. Currie, 51 Mo. App. 40; DeSteiger v. Hollington, 17 Mo. App. 382. (2) The plaintiff could not act as the agent of Dodd, and at the same time and in the same matter act as the agent of the defendant who was the opposite party in the transaction and whose interests were in direct conflict with those of…
1Opinion of the CourtBarclay, J.
— This is an action by the plaintiff, a. real estate agent, to recover “commissions” for effecting a lease of certain real property for a term of ninety-nine years to Mr. Samuel M. Dodd. The property is that on which stands houses Nos. 412, 414, 416, on Washington avenue, in St. Louis. It belonged to defendant. According to plaintiff’s petition it was leased by defendant" to Mr. Dodd through the agency of plaintiff at a rental of four per cent net, on a valuation of $125,000.
The answer admits the making of the lease as described, but “charges the fact to be that the plaintiff, in the matter…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wadsworth v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Scribner v. CollarMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Atlee v. FinkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Leathers v. CanfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by3 opinions
- Merton v. J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Winter v. CareyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Dennison v. GaultMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908