Raeder v. Butler

Citations

• 19 Pa. Super. 604
• 1902 Pa. Super. LEXIS 159

Syllabus

<p>Principal and agent — Beal estate broker — Commissions — Evidence— Question for jury.</p> <p>In an action to recover commissions for the sale of real estate, where the evidence offered by the defendant to the effect that the plaintiff was a real estate broker without license, is more than mere scintilla, the case is for the jury. In such a case a written contract between the parties by which the plaintiff was to sell real estate belonging to the defendant for a commission is some evidence bearing upon the plaintiff’s business.</p> <p>The expression “placed in the hands of .... to be sold” used in a contract by which one person agrees to sell the land of another for a commission, does not confer upon the agent a right to the possession of the real estate. It is a familiar form of expression used to indicate the appointment of an agent for the sale of property.</p> <p>The legislation requiring a real estate broker to take out a license is not intended to prevent a person whose business and occupation is not that of a real estate broker from receiving compensation for services rendered in buying and selling real estate belonging to another.</p> <p>Where a person agrees to sell real estate to another for a price not less than $25,000, and “ to have for his time, trouble, services and advertising $500 commissions,” and if the property is sold by another to be paid “commission aforesaid for his time, trouble, services and advertising,” and the owner sells the property himself for a sum less than $25,000, the agent is entitled, if he has performed the duties imposed upon him by the contract, to two per cent on the price realized.</p>