Folds v. Lifsey Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Folds v. Lifsey Co.

105 S.E. 854, 26 Ga. App. 297, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 109

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1921

Docket11615

StatusPublished

This text of 105 S.E. 854 (Folds v. Lifsey Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Folds v. Lifsey Co., 105 S.E. 854, 26 Ga. App. 297, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 109 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. “ The fact that property is placed in the hands of a broker to sell does not prevent the owner from selling, unless otherwise agreed.” Civil Code (1910), § 3587. In a suit by a broker against the owner to recover for a commission on an alleged sale by the broker for the owner, where there is an issue of fact as to whether or not the broker was employed by the owner to sell the property, or whether or not the owner ratified the acts of the broker, and where it appears from the evidence that the owner sold the property himself, and without the aid of the broker, to a purchaser with whom the broker had negotiated for the sale of the property, it was error for the court to fail to charge the above proposition of law.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

1. “ The fact that property is placed in the hands of a broker to sell does not prevent the owner from selling, unless otherwise agreed.” Civil Code (1910), § 3587. In a suit by a broker against the owner to recover for a commission on an alleged sale by the broker for the owner, where there is an issue of fact as to whether or not the broker was employed by the owner to sell the property, or whether or not the owner ratified the acts of the broker, and where it appears from the evidence that the owner sold the property himself, and without the aid of the broker, to a purchaser with whom the broker had negotiated for the sale of the property, it was error for the court to fail to charge the above proposition of law.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 S.E. 854, 26 Ga. App. 297, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/folds-v-lifsey-co-gactapp-1921.