Chandler v. Gaines-Ferguson Realty Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Howard Circuit Court; James S. Steel, Judge; 1. There is no pretense that the purchaser would have taken the land at the price except all the land be sold. He would not have accepted a deed to all that part of the land in controversy less the homestead of the owner. There is no allegation or proof of a sale of any part of the premises less than the whole.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Howard Circuit Court; James S. Steel, Judge; 1. There is no pretense that the purchaser would have taken the land at the price except all the land be sold. He would not have accepted a deed to all that part of the land in controversy less the homestead of the owner. There is no allegation or proof of a sale of any part of the premises less than the whole. The contract with Gaines-Ferguson Realty Company was a single and indivisible one for the whole 320' acres, and if void as to part is void in toto. 63 Ark. 187, 202. 2. The demurrer admits the truth of the allegations of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith,- J.
This is an action to recover a commission for an alleged sale of real estate. Appellees, who were plaintiffs below, are partners in the real estate business, and on June 25, 1918, entered into a contract with appellant whereby he gave them the right, for a period of twelve months, to sell his farm, containing 320 acres, and farming implements, for $9,000 net to the owner, of which $4,500 was to be paid in cash, and the remainder in one, two, three, four, five and six years, at 8 per cent. Appellees were to receive as commissions the excess over $9,000.
Appellant wa's notified of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stiewel v. LallySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Hodges v. BayleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by4 opinions
- Reynolds v. AshabrannerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Portis v. ThrashSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Belyeu v. HudsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Green v. ToneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975