Horton & Co. v. Beall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court; Jacob M. Carter, Judge; 1. If appellants’ efforts in bringing about negotiations between appellee, .acting for himself, and Colter & Company, acting for their client, was the cause originating in a series of events which, without break in their continuity, resulted in the sale or exchange of the land, appellants, in contemplation of law, are the procuring cause of the sale, and are entitled to their commission. 76 Ark. 375; 84 Ark. 462,…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court; Jacob M. Carter, Judge; 1. If appellants’ efforts in bringing about negotiations between appellee, .acting for himself, and Colter & Company, acting for their client, was the cause originating in a series of events which, without break in their continuity, resulted in the sale or exchange of the land, appellants, in contemplation of law, are the procuring cause of the sale, and are entitled to their commission. 76 Ark. 375; 84 Ark. 462, 467; 53 Ark. 49; 89 Ark. 203; 71 Conn. 590; 44 L. E. A. 321, and note; 27 L. E. A. (N. S.) 198; 165 S. W. 503; Id. 1119;…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This is an action instituted by appellants-against appellees to recover commissions alleged to be due on the sale of a plantation in Hempstead County, Arkansas, owned by .appellees. Appellants are real estate brokers at Hope and appellees entered into a contract, giving them exclusive right during a period of six months, to sell the plantation for a commission. That period expired without any progress being made toward a sale, -and thereafter appellees continued the auauthority of appellants to sell or exchange the property and agreed to pay them a commission, but the agreement did not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Meyer v. HollandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Simpson v. BlewittSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913