Gould

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the sum of $640 claimed to be due for services rendered in connection with the sale of defendants’ real property, and was given judgment for the sum of $300. The defendants appeal.

The amended complaint contained six counts. The first declared upon an agreement authorizing respondent to sell said real property at a stated price, for commission of $640; the others were common counts, the third being a quantum meruit for services rendered at appellants’ request. Answering, appellants denied the allegations of the respective counts, and alleged as affirmative defense that the agreement upon which the several causes of action were founded was unenforceable because there was no note or memorandum thereof in writing subscribed by appellants or. their agent, as is required by the statute of frauds. (Subd. 6, see. 1973, Code Civ. Proc.; subd. 6, sec. 1624, Civ. Code.)

The material facts are not disputed, and are as follows: On March 9, 1924, at the office of the California Homes Association in San Carlos, San Mateo County, appellants verbally authorized respondent to sell the real property described in the complaint, respondent at the time being…