Atwater v. Lockwood
Supreme Court of Connecticut
General Assumpsit, to recover a commission for the sale of land by the plaintiff, a real estate broker; brought to the Court of Common Pleas, and reserved for advice on the following facts found by the court: The plaintiff began to deal as a real estate broker in December, 1868, in the town of Greenwich.
Read the full summary
General Assumpsit, to recover a commission for the sale of land by the plaintiff, a real estate broker; brought to the Court of Common Pleas, and reserved for advice on the following facts found by the court: The plaintiff began to deal as a real estate broker in December, 1868, in the town of Greenwich. He had purchased property for himself near Coscob, before March, 1869, at the price of $400 per acre, and owned the same at the time of the sale by the defendant to Oakes, hereinafter mentioned. Before the first day of March, 1869, the plaintiff met the defendant at Mianus, near Coscob, and…
1Opinion of the CourtPark, J.
The plaintiff cannot recover in .this suit unless he establishes the fact that he was employed by the defendant to act fox him in the sale of his land. The plaintiff concedes that he was riot expressly employed, and the only question for us to determine is whether the facts of the case show an employment by implication of law. The fact is substantially found that the defendant never knew during- the transaction of sale that the plaintiff was acting for him, or was rendering any intentional service for his benefit, and we can discover nothing whatever in the case that tended to give him such…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Windsor v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Cornet & Zeibig, Inc. v. 430 Withers Realty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1967
- Campbell v. FullerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881