Degginger v. Martin

Citations

• 48 Wash. 1
• 92 P. 674
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 843

Syllabus

<p>Frauds, Statute of — Contract to Sell Land — Oral Authority— Evidence. Proof of oral authority to a real estate broker to make a binding contract of sale, within the requirements of the statute of frauds, is sufficiently clear and convincing, within the rule which requires such degree of proof, when liberally construed on motion for a nonsuit, where the broker testified that the owner had listed the property with him, and on departing for a short absence, instructed him “to sell quick, take the money and close the deal” before the owner’s return, if he could do so.</p> <p>Specific Performance — Tender—Sufficiency. Where a broker is authorized to make a contract of sale, a tender of the price to the agent is sufficient, when the owner is absent from the state, to entitle the purchaser to specific performance.</p> <p>Same — Necessity. Where the owner repudiates a sale made by an agent, tender of the price is not a condition precedent to an action for specific performance.</p> <p>Frauds, Statute of- — Contract—Signing. A broker’s contract for the sale of lands is sufficiently signed where the firm name under which the broker did business was typewritten, and he signed his initials below.</p> <p>Trial — Before the Court^-Admission of Evidence. Upon the trial of a cause before a court without a jury, testimony offered should be liberally received, to avoid the necessity of a reversal in case of a trial de novo on appeal.</p>