(Download) "Brown v. State" by Mississippi Supreme Court * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Brown v. State
- Author : Mississippi Supreme Court
- Release Date : January 04, 1999
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
Real Property — Brokers — Commissions — Breach of Contract by Owner — "Good," "Clear," "Marketable" Title Equivalent to Fee-simple Title — Statute of Frauds. Real Estate Brokers — Commissions — Note or Memorandum Required by Statute of Frauds Indispensable Prerequisite to Recovery. 1. Under the statute of frauds (sec. 7519, Rev. Codes 1921) one who seeks to recover a brokers commission upon an agreement authorizing him to procure a purchaser of real property must be able to show a note or memorandum, subscribed by the party to be charged or his agent, and where the original agreement was modified in its terms, the modification must likewise have been in writing and subscribed, the two being considered together as constituting the note or memorandum required by section 7519. Same — When Broker Entitled to Commissions. 2. A real estate broker earns his commission whenever, within the time limit, he produces a purchaser ready, able and willing to buy the property in compliance with the terms of the brokerage contract, in the absence of a contract containing different provisions. Real Property — Fee-simple Title — Definition. 3. A fee-simple title signifies an estate of inheritance clear of any condition, limitation or restriction; it stands at the head of estates as the highest in dignity and the most ample in extent. Same — "Marketable," "Good," "Clear" Title Equivalent to Fee-simple Title. 4. A "marketable title," a "good title" and "clear title" are equivalent; they mean a title concerning which there is no fair or reasonable doubt, one which a court of equity would compel a purchaser to accept in a suit by the vendor for specific performance, to-wit: a fee-simple title. Page 394 Real Estate Brokers — Commissions — Offer to Accept "Clear" Title not Variance from Owners Contractual Obligation to Furnish "Marketable" Title — Evidence. 5. Under the last above rule, held that where the land owner pursuant to a brokerage contract agreed to furnish to the buyer an abstract of title showing a "marketable title" and the broker in a letter of acceptance to the owner stated that the purchase price would be paid when the latter would furnish an abstract showing a "clear title," the court erred in excluding from evidence the letter under objection that the acceptance varied the terms of the brokerage contract, the objection being untenable, in that a "marketable" and a "clear" title mean the same thing.
 "Brown v. State" by Mississippi Supreme Court * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}