Eagleson

White Et Ux. v. Eagleson

Good Law
13 Alaska 531·193 F.2d 567·1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2934
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 29, 195112592California938 words

Opinion

Opinion

McCORMICK, J.

This is an appeal from the final judgment, after a verdict of the jury rendered in the District Court for the Territory of Alaska, Third Division. Judgment was for $3500 plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees in favor of the plaintiff, Clara M. Eagleson, appellee herein, and against defendants Lawrence A. White and Erma R. White, appellants herein.

Under date of July 7, 1948, by a written instrument captioned “Authorization to Sell” the appellants, husband and wife, owners and partners in a going “combined candy-making and retail and restaurant business,” known as L. W. Chocolate Shop, at Anchorage, Alaska, had given to appellee, a licensed real estate broker, the exclusive sale or transfer of such business for the agreed price of $45,000. The writing was unilateral in that it was signed only by the appellants.

The form that was used in obtaining the agency appointment was prepared entirely by Carl T. Rentschler, one of the staff of the appellee broker under her direction. It erroneously describes the property involved as “real estate.” It also contains contradictory and confusing terms relative to the status and powers of the agent appointed therein. It states in one place…

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.