Schmalzried v. Findley
This text of 394 So. 2d 436 (Schmalzried v. Findley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The summary judgment entered below is reversed because the record reflects a genuine, triable issue as to whether the plaintiff-brokers earned their commission by producing a buyer ready, willing, and able to purchase on terms acceptable to the defendant-seller, and upon which he actually and specifically agreed. Hopkins v. Gibson Furniture, Inc., 312 So.2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Jerry Norris, Inc. v. Ackel, 311 So.2d 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Cammack v. Leonhardt, 302 So.2d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974); see generally, Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
394 So. 2d 436, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schmalzried-v-findley-fladistctapp-1981.