Legal Opinion · Dissent

M. E. Walbridge Agency, Inc. v. Rutland Hospital, Inc.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 1, 1962No. 1021Published

1DissentHolden, J.

To my mind liability has been invoked against the defendant on conjecture rather than fact.

The agreement of the parties developed in three steps. At the outset, there was a mere listing of the Stern’s property with the plaintiff on five percent commission for sale at $150,000, without mention of the lease and option held by Frank Freeman. At a later date, when this complication was called to the plaintiff’s attention, he sought and obtained protection from a situation that might develop in the event the plaintiff produced a purchaser who was ready to purchase at a price acceptable to the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Kacavas v. DiamondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  2. John T. Burns & Sons Inc. v. HandsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  3. E. A. Strout Realty Agency, Inc. v. WoosterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1953
  4. Dunnett v. Shields and ConantSupreme Court of Vermont · 1924
  5. Leicht-Benson Realty & Construction Corp. v. J. D. Stone & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1924

7 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