Legal Opinion

Rothberg v. Manhattan Coil Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 12, 1951No. 33576PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The petition as finally amended set out a contract to procure a buyer for the defendant’s real property; the commission to be charged upon completion thereof; the fact that the plaintiff was a licensed broker entitled to the commissions charged, and that he did procure one ready, willing and able to purchase the property on the terms stipulated. A real-estate broker is entitled to collect his commission under these circumstances, whether or not the sale is actually consummated. See Code, § 4-213. In consequence, the sole question for decision was whether…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Conney v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
  2. Fitzgerald Cotton Oil Co. v. Farmers Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  3. Garmany v. LawtonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
  4. Tingle v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  5. Green v. SpiresSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Atlanta Limousine Airport Services, Inc. v. RinkerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
  2. Knowles v. GwynnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1968
  3. Seibels, Bruce & Co. v. H. H. Burnet & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  4. The DRAGON CORPORATION v. SyphersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1952
  5. Murphy v. HOSANNA YOUTH FACILITIES, INC.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2010

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API