Belt v. Goode
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. It is deemed unnecessary to set forth the facts in evidence more fully than they appear in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. It is deemed unnecessary to set forth the facts in evidence more fully than they appear in the opinion of the court. The court, of its own motion, gave the following instruction: “ If the jury find that the defendant employed plaintiffs in the capacity of real estate agents to sell land for him, and that they effected a sale thereof agreeably to such employment, and that there was no special agreement as to the compensation they in that behalf rendered, then the plaintiffs are entitled to recover a reasonable compensation for such services. But if the jury…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge
Judge Gaston observed, in the case of Young v. Jeffries, 4 Dev. & Batt. 220, that “ where a contract is by parol, the terms of the agreement are of course a matter of fact, and if those terms be obscure or equivocal, or are susceptible of explanation from extrinsic evidence, it is for the jury to find also the meaning of the terms employed ; that the effect of a *130parol agreement, when its terms are given and their meaning fixed, is as much a question of law as the construction of a written instrument.”
The question in this case was purely one of fact. The plaintiffs were employed by the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Lewis Ex Rel. Piening v. ZagataSupreme Court of Missouri · 1942
- Carpenter v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
- Stagner v. StaplesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1968
- Embry v. HargadineMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Jungeman v. Joseph Schnaider Brewing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.