Wilson

Wilson v. Roppolo

Good Law
1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 1906·207 Cal. App. 2d 276·24 Cal. Rptr. 437
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 1962Civ. 20176California2,697 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bray, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff for a real estate commission.

Question Presented

Did plaintiff produce a buyer ready, able and willing to buy within the time allotted in the listing agreement?

Record

It is conceded that on January 9,1956, plaintiff through his salesman, Carlson, received an “open” listing agreement from defendants authorizing him to sell certain real property belonging to them, and providing that defendants would pay a commission upon sale. The agreement provided: “This employment and authorization automatically cancels 6 months from date, on June 9, 1956.” (Emphasis added.) The evidence shows, and the court found, and defendants practically concede that the date was erroneous, and should have been July 9 as the listing was for a six months’ period. There is very little conflict in the evidence. It is the legal conclusions therefrom on which the parties disagree.

Carlson showed the property a number of times prior to May 23, and had received an inquiry concerning it from one Albert J. Bernard. On that date Carlson described the property to Bernard, who expressed an interest in it. Carlson made an appointment with Bernard to show him…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.