Legal Opinion
Brooks v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 30, 1954No. 1555PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Chief Judge.
Congress has required that as a condition of receiving a license every real estate broker in this jurisdiction must furnish a bond, and has authorized persons injured by a broker’s misconduct to bring suit against the surety on such bond. This was' such a suit.
Plaintiff charged that a broker named Evans had in 1944 undertaken to invest $3,-000 for her under a written agreement which recited that the investment was to yield a five per cent return and was to be repaid in monthly installments. Much later, in 1950, apparently apprehensive as to the safety of the investment,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Krupsaw v. W. T. Cowan, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- Layne v. MalmgrenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Ruby v. HardinOhio Court of Appeals · 1941
- Northern Ins. Co. of New York v. FischerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1954
- Woods v. National Surety Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Robinson v. Missouri Real Estate CommissionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955
- Ingram v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955