Zide v. Zenchenko

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zide v. Zenchenko

101 So. 2d 64

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 27, 1958

DocketNo. 57-354

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 101 So. 2d 64 (Zide v. Zenchenko) 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.

Bluebook

Zide v. Zenchenko, 101 So. 2d 64 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant is a real estate broker who sought to recover a commission by a cross complaint in chancery. The sale had failed because of a defect in title. The chancellor found upon the basis of conflicting testimony that the broker accepted employment with knowledge of the defect and that it might preclude a sale. The chancellor properly dismissed the cross bill after trial. See Camp Lumber Co. v. Tedder, 78 Fla. 183, 82 So. 865, where the absence of notice of defective title is set forth as an element necessary for recovery by broker upon a sale which fails because of defective title in the seller. See cases cited in Best v. Kelley, 22 Wash.2d 257, 155 P.2d 794, 156 A.L.R. 1398; 169 A.L.R. 617.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant is a real estate broker who sought to recover a commission by a cross complaint in chancery. The sale had failed because of a defect in title. The chancellor found upon the basis of conflicting testimony that the broker accepted employment with knowledge of the defect and that it might preclude a sale. The chancellor properly dismissed the cross bill after trial. See Camp Lumber Co. v. Tedder, 78 Fla. 183, 82 So. 865, where the absence of notice of defective title is set forth as an element necessary for recovery by broker upon a sale which fails because of defective title in the seller. See cases cited in Best v. Kelley, 22 Wash.2d 257, 155 P.2d 794, 156 A.L.R. 1398; 169 A.L.R. 617.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 So. 2d 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zide-v-zenchenko-fladistctapp-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack