Payzant v. Caudill

Citations

• 89 Wash. 250
• 154 P. 170

Syllabus

<p>Tbial — Direction oe Verdict — Question eor Jury. A directed verdict or judgment non obstante cannot be ordered where there is evidence on hehalf of respondent upon an issue of fact determining the liability.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error — Instructions. In an action for a broker’s commissions, it is not error to refuse an instruction defining a real estate broker and stating the law as to liability for commissions, where the court instructed the jury that plaintiffs were real estate brokers, had made the sale and procured an able and willing customer and were entitled to commissions unless they had agreed to make no charge for commissions, thereby reducing the issues to their ultimate.</p> <p>Brokers — Action eor Commissions — Issues and Proof. In an action for a broker’s commissions, instructions upon an issue as to whether plaintiffs had agreed not to charge any commissions are proper where a trade had been contemplated, and one of the brokers admitted that he offered to either make the exchange or sell the property for cash clear without any commission, making a price “cash net to them.”</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Discretion—New Trial. Where the trial court exercised its discretion in refusing to grant a new trial for insufficiency of evidence, as indicated by refusing the new trial after having first declared the evidence incredible and improbable, the discretion is not subject to review on appeal, in the absence of manifest abuse of discretion.</p>