Clague

Henley, Halfhill & Nicklin v. Clague

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 511·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 40·120 P. 61
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 20, 1911Civ. No. 995.California360 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

The action is one to recover commissions by real estate brokers. Judgment went for defendant, from which, and an order denying a new trial, plaintiff appeals.

The facts are these: One Doig was the owner of certain real property in Orange county. In October, 1908, he executed an instrument through which he declared that he had placed with plaintiff his property, which he desired to exchange for _ certain specified property in the city of Los Angeles; that upon the latter property were certain mortgages ; that as a condition precedent to the trade an extension of time for the payment of such mortgages should be secured, ten days being given therefor. Plaintiff procured defendant, who was the owner of the Los Angeles property, to indorse on such written proposition an acceptance thereof upon the terms therein stated, and an agreement to pay $1,000 commission for said exchange. The extension of time for the payment of the mortgages was never procured by anyone and the exchange was never effected, notwithstanding which, plaintiff, as a broker, claims from defendant Clague the $1,000 commission to be paid upon the exchange.

We perceive no error in the record. The condition precedent…

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.