Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Geyler v. Dailey

Supreme Court of Arizona

April 24, 1950

GEYLER
v.
DAILEY et ux

Judgment reversed and cause remanded with instructions to enter judgment for plaintiff.

Harold R. Scoville, of Phoenix, Charles A. Stanecker, of Phoenix, attorneys for appellant.

Fred V. Moore, of Phoenix, attorney for appellees.

Phelps, Justice. La Prade, C. J., and Udall, Stanford and De Concini, JJ., concur.

OPINION

Phelps, Justice.

[70 Ariz. 136] Appellant was plaintiff and appellees defendants in the trial court and they will be thus designated in this opinion. The facts in the case are that at all times here involved plaintiff was a duly licensed real estate broker engaged in the business of selling real estate in Arizona.

On August 28, 1947 defendants Dailey entered into a contract in writing with plaintiff giving to plaintiff the exclusive right until January 1, 1948, to sell an 80-acre ranch belonging to defendants for the sum of $ 32,000 payable in the manner provided in said contract and agreeing therein to pay a 5% commission to plaintiff in the event of sale.

Thereafter on October 10, 1947 plaintiff procured a purchaser for the ranch at the price named and payable in the manner provided for in the contract. The proposed purchaser was ready, able and willing to perform each and all of the terms of purchase provided for in the contract and at the time tendered his check in the sum of $ 3200 as earnest money. Defendants [70 Ariz. 137] refused to sell the ranch to the purchaser and claimed as an excuse therefor that they had on the previous day, to wit, on October 9th revoked plaintiff's authority to sell the ranch.

Plaintiff brought an action in the superior court of Maricopa County to recover the sum of $ 1600 as and for his commission

Page 584

as provided for in the contract. The cause was tried to a jury and a verdict and judgment was rendered in favor of defendants. From the judgment and order denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.

Plaintiff assigns the following errors:

1. The court erred in failing and refusing to direct a verdict for plaintiff at the conclusion of the case for the reason that the evidence established a full performance ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.