Orr Co. v. Interlaken Land Co.

Citations

• 74 Wash. 340
• 133 P. 599
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 2054

Syllabus

<p>Brokers — Commissions — Contracts — Performance — “Sale.” A broker, haying a contract for the exclusive sale of a large tract of residence property on commission, did not make a sale entitling him to commissions, where, in the hope of inducing sales of the balance of the property, he procured a building company to enter into a contract to draw plans for and put up ten residences under a co-operative plan, work on which was to proceed only on the sale of each successive lot to third parties, and no present title passed, the owner merely agreeing to pass title to the building company in order to ser cure a loan for fifty per cent of the cost of the buildings, give a second mortgage, and make sales to third parties, no such sales being made by the broker and the second contract not providing for the payment of commissions; since the execution of the second contract ipso facto withdrew the property specified from the operation of the first contract, without effecting any sale thereof.</p> <p>Same — Contracts—Frauds, Statute of. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 5289, providing that a contract for a broker’s commission on the sale of real estate must be in writing, a broker is not entitled to commissions unless the writing determines the amount of the agreed upon commissions without resort to parol testimony.</p>