Quick v. Pointer

186 F.2d 355, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 47, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2330
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedNovember 30, 1950
Docket10460_1
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 186 F.2d 355 (Quick v. Pointer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Quick v. Pointer, 186 F.2d 355, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 47, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2330 (D.C. Cir. 1950).

Opinion

PRETTYMAN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court for damages for breach of a contract to sell real estate and for a real estate agent’s commission. The contract was for a price of $16,000. Ten days after the contract was made, and before settlement day, the purchaser made a contract for a resale at $19,500. It then appeared that the original vendor did not have title, being part but not full owner of the property. His vendee sued. The trial court, without other evidence as to damages and without other finding on the point, gave judgment for $3,500, the difference between the prices in the two contracts.

The established rule in this jurisdiction is that damages under these circumstances are the difference between the contract price and the fair market value of the property. 1 No mention of fair market value appears in this record, either in the evidence or in the findings. The judgment for the vendee must therefore be reversed on that point.

There was sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s conclusion that the *356 real estate agent produced a buyer ready, able and willing to buy. That was all the agent had to do in order to become entitled to his commission. The dispute as to whether he knew that his client was not full owner of the property was an issue of fact upon which the evidence conflicted. The judgment as to the commission is affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

1

. Peoples Mortg. Corporation v. Bedrosian, 1946, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 69, 154 P.2d 332; Bedrosian v. Peoples Mortgage Corporation, 1950, 87 U.S.App.D.C. —, 182 F.2d 395; Thompson v. Rector, 1948, 83 U.S.App.D.C. 371, 170 F.2d 167.

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

Related

HAVILAH REAL PROPERTY SERVICES, LLC v. VLK, LLC
108 A.3d 334 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2015)
Capitol Justice LLC v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.
706 F. Supp. 2d 23 (District of Columbia, 2009)
Basiliko v. Pargo Corp.
532 A.2d 1346 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1987)
Fateh v. Rich
481 A.2d 464 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1984)
Pleasure Time, Inc. v. Kuss
254 N.W.2d 463 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1977)
Reed v. Wadsworth
553 P.2d 1024 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1976)
Aboud v. Adams
507 P.2d 430 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1973)
Gil Grady v. De Ville Motor Hotel, Inc.
415 F.2d 449 (Tenth Circuit, 1969)
William B. Wolf v. William Cohen
379 F.2d 477 (D.C. Circuit, 1967)
Cohen v. Lovitz
255 F. Supp. 302 (District of Columbia, 1966)
Haviland v. Dawson
210 A.2d 551 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1965)
Wheeler v. Burger
126 A.2d 869 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1956)
Slater v. Berlin
94 A.2d 38 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 F.2d 355, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 47, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quick-v-pointer-cadc-1950.