Grimes v. Emery

Citations

• 94 Kan. 701
• 146 P. 1135
• 1915 Kan. LEXIS 151

Syllabus

<p>OPINION ON REHEARING.</p> <p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Sale of Real Estate — Commissions—Fact for Jury.' The question whether a real-estate agent is the procuring cause of the sale of a farm is one of fact to be determined by the jury in the light of all the circumstances leading up to the final negotiations between the vendor and purchaser.</p> <p>2. Same — Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Evidence — Properly Overruled. Emery listed his farm for sale with Grimes on November 1, 1911; Grimes called several times on Kline, seeking to sell him the farm; on February 13, 1912, Emery had a conversation with Grimes in which he said he might cut the price for an immediate sale; Grimes told Emery that he had a man north of Ada (meaning Kline), who might buy, but did not tell who the prospective purchaser was; on February 15, 1912, Grimes saw Kline, and again solicited him to buy, and to go and look at the farm; Kline said he wanted to look at some other lands first, but tacitly agreed to go; on April 12, 1912, Kline called on Emery, seeking to buy the farm, and, after being assured by Kline that no real-estate agent had sent him, Emery, without further inquiry, sold the farm to Kline. Held, that it was not error to overrule a demurrer to the evidence on the point that Grimes was the procuring cause of the sale in an action by Grimes to recover a commission for his services.</p> <p>3. Same — Trial — Instructions — Not Prejudicially Erroneous. Where the instructions taken together define the law with substantial accuracy, and no special instruction is asked covering some controverted point in the evidence, reversible error can not be predicated upon one instruction, not inherently misleading, when it is supported, amplified and explained to the jury by the other instructions.</p>