![]() |
![]() |
Free Books / Real Estate / American Law Of Real Estate Agency / | ![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
||||
|
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
Sec. 1041. Instruction Not Inconsistent With Terms Of Contract In Securing Title, Etc |
![]() |
||
![]() |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||
![]() |
||||
This section is from the book "American Law Of Real Estate Agency", by William Slee Walker. Also available from Amazon: American law of real estate agency.
In an action for commissions under a contract by which plaintiff was employed to assist defendant in acquiring a title to property for the purpose of effecting a consolidation of it with other property, a charge that plaintiff could not recover if the defendants were unable to effect a sale with the owner, and other persons in co-operation with defendant did so and effected a consolidation, even though defendant contributed to the purchase, was not inconsistent with the terms of the contract, since the thing contracted to be done was the securing of the title to the property and the making of the consolidation by plaintiff and not by another person unconnected with defendant. Bailey v. Carleton, 43 Colo. 4, 95 P. 542.
 
Continue to:
agent, real estate agency, brokerage, commissions, compensation, contracts, duties, exchanges, exclusive contracts, forms, interpretations, judicial constructions, leases, liabilities of principal, listing, loans, options, contracts, pleadings, practice, law, rights, sales
![]() |
|
|