Case ID: kan_89/html/0807-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "West, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. P. Weigand, Appellee, v. R. F. Knight et al., Appellants.
    
    No. 18,223.
    SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
    Real-estate Agent — Whether Commission Was Earned — Question for Jury. When an owner of real estate has listed it with an agent who becomes the proximate, primary and procuring cause of a sale, a commission is thereby earned; and when there is a conflict of evidence as to whether such sale was thus procured, or by the owner after negotiations put on foot by such agent were broken off, and the jury find in the agent’s favor, and such finding is supported by competent testimony and approved by the trial court, it will not be disturbed.
    ~ Appeal from Sedgwick district court, division, No. 2.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1913.
    Affirmed.
    
      Rodolph Hatfield, of Wichita, for the appellants.
    
      A. V. Roberts, of Wichita, for the appellee.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

West, J.:

The'plaintiff recovered a judgment for commission on a sale of real estate. The defendants appeal and insist that the evidence showed that the negotiations put on foot by the agent had been abandoned and that the sale was made by the owner unaided by such negotiations. There is no trouble about the law of the case. Testimony on which the jury found their general verdict in favor of the plaintiff was conflicting but furnished support therefor, and such verdict was approved by the trial court.

Not being triers of fact but being bound by the result reached by the jury and the court below we must affirm the judgment..