ARK.] MACLAFFERTY V. PAYNE. 569 MACLAFFERTY V. PAYNE. Opinion delivered November 17, 1919. REAL ESTATE BROKERS-COMMISSION--RIGHT OF OWNER TO RAISE PRICE. —When the owner of property has listed the same for sale with a broker, he may raise the price demanded for the property at any time before the broker produces a purchaser, ready, willing and able to buy. Appeal from Polk Circuit Court ; James S. Steel, Judge ; reversed.
LAqTJAFFERTY p„P.Ayzc,E. L1-40 1?ri , c4tt & pkni, fox appellant:. o n the evidence- def ' endant was . entitled . to a per,- pmptory instyncti9 o vetuin avordi 1iri, There eyidence that qppellee proaticed a mrehaser„xeady, AqiTtg 4 n4 P .1 9 1e t9 TbQ,ccttlEt's_in§trilPi-Aon was . errgr,. and th'e ,yerdict..is_ contrary .to. the ffif donce,,qnd the ,coart should . , have directed :a yer_clit (Je f cndant. . • ,.,t • -maq Ndrti;o •ud . 411ey;'for•ap'pellee. t• r `" '• .) Pht agent 'di'd .'rna willing to piii-Chae' i on' did \ternas'dfered,'Uut-On13)-31-a tojuv with hbVids.lii&eead 16P`W1i!"'N"OAt. L. R.
4. `1 , ( N. 8.) 329.''-''AiiiiA6e . "-W •Wentitled* t'd an ingttated Vei-, dict . 'Under th • ;r, i e l eN;Itle-146'.' Tlie"fudginent-i" _ i; / J.WOZi iic IIPIRTIRF M-,. Appellee instituted- suit agains,t appellant, before . , S, aft , -Smithit ,a , jusVce :of the, peae,ei.iirt center township, goll.c:Qot-mty, .AAansas, to,r,ecovor,$17.51 .: as a commission for producing 1.1.mirchaserifor,aillusinessi buj,ldin , g , in 1\pna, ,. 0 , wnpq y App i ellant, po j , been f . iVecr ith' tin( s4Ve. at '0,14(). 6fal. Ole 'Mag-, isfrateq cou4 reptd te . 4 . i ; n -; ' Ii.ctgxnexit t ' o • r a • p -. pene . e 1 R ' o - , m 1. 00 . 1 w s taken t9 i the cirpAt'couft Of_ saa e?a4 1 c:zoith,f'„c480", Oie:Ap;upe -was spbM,it'teek' ingrueficins of-:thp pow , ,, whiCh resultefl in a,vgdiet i a4d favor of appellee. rom thA -iifdgment'aii appeal hatg been duly prosecuted to this court. The evidence on behalf of appellee showed that appellant was the owner , of ai brick huildng in Mena, which he listed with aptielled,a reateg tate agent, for sale at a net price of $3,500 in f bash; that/on/414 , itiOniifig of Octo-her , 2,..194 pppollee , pAnted ,. 9mtand priced the prop: eri ty atAfie liated price. tcLai p.roveptive .purchaser ,by- the name of , Stevens ; . .that, Stevens sholVed ani interest. in; the 0 , 6-perty . andImade an-aptidintmefAl to-retlirn in-the'afternoon ; that at noon, as he went to dinner, af3pellee hafffied P-1 1 1101 a nt thqtbe hfi.d.. a Pr9S.D g ettN 1Pilre liaq tr fpr. the property at the listed price; that a PPC1Jant ,raiseCthe
AkJ] 571 p fi&nr' at ihát tithe' it,' 4,10U ; ;"th r ut NSili eh tlri pvich a ge r VeLi tUrhed lirthe afternodn;hc r'intOrtned'hiln'th r at 'appellant: had rhiked"the; t briee-fronii'thirtyfi'Ve•'luilidred . to.f own tlanttdbfldr • ;! ' that'apP erlIM then: liftro &aced pectii;:e'flurafaser o ippcIlnti -p lat ilie.lpureha'Ar''`of-' f6red. w:ellant ' $3;5130 goerhrbent b ¶whiblv vas.' iefligedy. not. betanse11he 7 offer \MS' bon?l g ilWead oft
cah,bt , becanse he had Ittise'cT the • Wiel e‘kif the prop eiiy hundred: To lohr tho-usandi dollarsi ihat. se+bral .cOuntdr-Tiropositiohg.,pa'as 64- r Uutwe6ri•.appellant' and'the OufehaVer; 'Mt th;o'nia t6i WA 0 s tp on ed later date; that on the next day, in the prosenocof pOlee;!• the:purc1in1- aferea p,a. ,1 the7gommissiai1and
gi+h 'kpriellant . $3,50Cf ;in goverhinent bonds f the',•pirdpi erty , , • 'and:that . 4peHant a6cepted . 'the offerthatrarivelluti thereupon directed them to go t43, fhe hanlvcand'hfer into! a written agreement to that . effeRt;iith i at j Vwpwent i tp, the bank for that purpose, where they became involved in a dispute as to the terms Tif the de —al and failed to consummate it'' , " t • T•.!" ; Over . 0m :(> 1?* i PnifOtRPP,9 11 4844 1)1q 101-1s P )was sent to the jury upon the theory that appellant would . be re; sOnAte,:f0 the,r . CoAr .4i,SSIKR,.'appflie . M. OdUceCl Apur-. „KM; rP dX,4141-t w Ai l?g)SP P0,417%04 t . 3 v 51:1-9P[Qt, in gOvernment bonds.fo . saklipropentyt,.,4 appellant,at; the time •expressedilliniself:As:lbeingrsatMee:with.boreds lietr , oftttsh? Thts'Avas at•errofieMs theorf tip6tY!irhich to submit the case, because appellarileYNTA'''Periight tiTraige'thd r -Price '. t ii•fie ro :1 -3:efofd' affelleel4rOduced. Kpli:ChaAei!,,read,a0 eppropy at the ,,listed.price_,.,:iipaleq,,himselfr, that„lvfore any -offer: wa s , made-hy,the,purelras er-,, ,appellant informed hill/ that : he ha d. ra i s ed the- p rite • from r thirtrE fiVe hundred to four thousand d'dllit& ot Tte' dialy'iNurd r$regdlit'ed by the M4Cienee:' fi ,d, ,r t t h rw g t, e "lthMn , f ragFe'cl, to 1.i.1 • 7 .pey, ,T,,g9yernx,new i, p s irTorr. saio ff _prop-Qrty, .4fter . :they were introciuee4,th . .each by.,appel-lee, and whether the . deal failed through th-o fault of.ap-
572 [140 pellant. Appellee testified that appellant and the prospective purchaser entered into such an agreement in his presence, and that, through his advice, they went to the bank to have a written contract prepared to that effect. C. E. Nance, cashier of the Farmers & Merchants Bank, where the parties went to have the contract prepared, testified that the deal was not consummated on account of a dispute arising between the parties as to the price to be paid for the property. Appellant's responsibility for the commission would depend upon whether he or the purchaser was at fault in terminating the deal before consummation. The cause was submitted to the jury upon a theory not warranted by the evidence, and, on account of the error indicated, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. Justice SMITH dissents.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.