Witherell v. Murphy
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Coftract for commissions and services in the sale of real estate for the defendant. The first count of the declaration was upon the following agreement signed by the defendant: “ North Adams, Mass., January 27th, 1886. I, Rosanna Murphy, of North Adams, hereby authorize and empower A. J. Witherell to sell the following described real estate, viz.: my hotel property on State Street, on the following terms; for §15,000, about one half cash, the deed to be a good and sufficient…
Read the full summary
Coftract for commissions and services in the sale of real estate for the defendant. The first count of the declaration was upon the following agreement signed by the defendant: “ North Adams, Mass., January 27th, 1886. I, Rosanna Murphy, of North Adams, hereby authorize and empower A. J. Witherell to sell the following described real estate, viz.: my hotel property on State Street, on the following terms; for §15,000, about one half cash, the deed to be a good and sufficient warranty deed, duly executed, and accompanied with a search made by--, and I further authorize him, the said A. J.…
1Opinion of the CourtKrowltoh, J.
The defendant contends that the sale of the real estate by the plaintiff for “ $15,000 cash on delivery of the deed,’ ’ was not in accordance with the terms of the written contract which authorized him to make a sale “ for $15,000, about one half cash.”
The contract was silent as to a sale for any larger sum, and also as to receiving more than one half of the price in cash, and as to the form in which that part of the price which was not required to be cash should be paid. It can hardly be contended that the sum named was a limitation of the plaintiff’s right to sell for a larger price if he…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Fitzpatrick v. GilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Walker v. RussellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Walsh v. GrantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Frankina v. SalpietroMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Holden v. StarksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.