Bailey v. Smith
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Birmingham. Tried before the Hon. W. W. Wxlicerson. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellants against the appellee, T.. li. Smith, to recover commissions, which they claimed as real estate agents.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Birmingham. Tried before the Hon. W. W. Wxlicerson. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellants against the appellee, T.. li. Smith, to recover commissions, which they claimed as real estate agents. The testimony is without conflict and showed that the plaintiffs were real estate agents or brokers in the city of Birmingham, and that in July, 1892, the defendant placed in their hands, for sale, a house and lot; that the terms of sale were $3,000, one-half to be paid in cash and the balance in one and two years, in equal instalments, with interest…
1Opinion of the CourtHead, J.
Action by appellants, real estate brokers, against appellee for commissions. Tried by the court without a jury, who found for defendant. The material facts will be set out by the reporter. Plaintiffs, while they had the property for sale, procured Mr. McClintock and others to look at it with the view of buying, but, after making every effort, were unable to induce any of them to agree to defendant’s terms. The next day after McClintock looked at the property, the plaintiffs’authority to sell was revoked by defendant. Mc-Clintock notified plaintiffs he would not buy. Some three or four weeks…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Handley v. ShafferSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Cadigan v. CrabtreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Abbott v. Hunt.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- Raleigh Real Estate & Trust Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Dancy v. BakerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.