Baldino v. Henneberry

Appellate Court of Illinois

Baldino v. Henneberry

191 Ill. App. 368

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedFebruary 4, 1915

DocketGen. No. 19,545

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 191 Ill. App. 368 (Baldino v. Henneberry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baldino v. Henneberry, 191 Ill. App. 368 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Brokers, § 29*—compensation where several brokers. Where an owner of real estate employs several real estate brokers to effect a sale of his property, the broker whose efforts actually bring about the sale is the one who is entitled to the commission for a sale, provided the owner acts in good faith. 2. Brokers, § 37*—necessity of showing procuring cause of sale. Where several brokers are employed to procure a purchaser for real estate and one of them brings an action for commissions, he not only must prove that he commenced negotiations with a party who subsequently purchased the property but, in order to recover, must also show by a preponderance of the evidence that he actually brought about a consummation of the sale, or was prevented from so doing by the fraud, procurement or misconduct or fault of the owner. 3. Brokers, § 90*—evidence insufficient to show procuring cause of sale. In an action for real estate commissions, evidence held. insufficient to show that a broker “actually brought about a consummation of the sale.” 4. Brokers, § 54*—evidence held insufficient to show bad faith in owner. Where a broker sought to recover commissions for effecting a sale of real estate, evidence held insufficient to show that the owner acted in bad faith in selling -the property through another agent, such as to entitle each broker to a commission.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Brokers, § 29*—compensation where several brokers. Where an owner of real estate employs several real estate brokers to effect a sale of his property, the broker whose efforts actually bring about the sale is the one who is entitled to the commission for a sale, provided the owner acts in good faith. 2. Brokers, § 37*—necessity of showing procuring cause of sale. Where several brokers are employed to procure a purchaser for real estate and one of them brings an action for commissions, he not only must prove that he commenced negotiations with a party who subsequently purchased the property but, in order to recover, must also show by a preponderance of the evidence that he actually brought about a consummation of the sale, or was prevented from so doing by the fraud, procurement or misconduct or fault of the owner. 3. Brokers, § 90*—evidence insufficient to show procuring cause of sale. In an action for real estate commissions, evidence held. insufficient to show that a broker “actually brought about a consummation of the sale.” 4. Brokers, § 54*—evidence held insufficient to show bad faith in owner. Where a broker sought to recover commissions for effecting a sale of real estate, evidence held insufficient to show that the owner acted in bad faith in selling -the property through another agent, such as to entitle each broker to a commission.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 Ill. App. 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baldino-v-henneberry-illappct-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack