Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1910-12-15


at the time the defendants asked him
if j. Alvin Weiss had anything to do
with the purchase, and that Binnard
told them no, and that the defend
ants stated they wouldn't enter into
the agreement if Mr.. Weiss had any
thing to do with it, as they didn't
believe he could raise the money; and
it appears also that few days after
wards MIR. Binnard made transfer
Of the property to the company in
New York.
"Mr. Phillips, upon learning that
the property had been sold to New
York parties, Immediately commenced
communications with Mr.. Weiss, it
having been several weeks since he
communicated with him, and Mr..
Weiss informed him of the whole
transaction, and Of all that had been
done, and when Mr.. Phillips learned
of the facts, he demanded of the de-
PENDANTS his commission. The de-
PENDANTS refused to pay
at is also shown that something
over $4,000 has been paid upon
this contract, and that there is vet
$4,000 yet to be paid in different
payments. The foregoing is sub
stantially the facts, and from these,
the court is to determine whether Mr..
Mr.. Phillips is entitled to a commits
sion for the sale Of the property.
'There is no question but what this
property was placed in Mr.. Phillips
hands, without any directions from
him to sell to any particular person,
or at any particular time. 1t is
claimed by the defendants that the
agreement made with Mr.. Phillips,
and deposited with the bank of Grange
vile, whereby the bank was to re-
tain ten per cent OF any moneys re-
tanned from the first contract and pay
it to Mr.. Phillips, was an agreement
which should be treated as an accord
and settlement for all prior matters,
and that by the whole of the facts
the court should conclude that the
parties at that time ceased all COM
munlcations with Mr.. Phillips, and
that he would have no right to get
any commission upon any sales made
after that date.
The court holds that Isaac Binnard
was but the agent Of Binnard Il Co.,
the latter having become interested
in the deal through Mr.. Weiss and
that Mr. Weiss was representing Mr..
Phillips. The court then continues:
at is also claimed by counsel for
the defendants that the facts in this
case show that Mr.. Phillips services
had been dispensed with a long time
prior to the time the property was
purchased There is not particle OF
evidence in this case which shows that
anyone of the defendants, or anyone
for them, at any time, ever told Mr..
Phillips in substance or in any other
manner, that he was not to be per-
mitted to 90 ahead and sell the pro-
perty. An agency cannot be ter
minated by the mere wishes OF the
principal, and the relations OF princi
pal and agent can be Terminated in
such matter as this by the principal
notifying the agent that the property
is taken out of his hands. But this
was not done, and even in such a
case as | have mentioned, where it is
undertaken to revoke the agency, the
principal cannot revoke the agency fol
the purpose of defeating the agent oul
of his commissions, nor can he revoke
it so as to take the right of the agent
to his commissions away from him
after the agent has done such thing.
as brought about the sale of the pro
perty. In other words, if an agen
finds purchaser, who is ready ane
willing to buy the property, and j
the principal notifies the agent that h
is discharged, ano then turns AROUND
and sells it to the purchaser, who wa
procured by the agent, the law vii
not permit him to defeat the agen
Of his commissions, if the agent wa
the procuring cause of the sale
'The law governing such matter
as this is well settled. 1t has beel
before this court in numerous matters
and the general rule is that wheneve
an agent finds purchaser ready, vii
ling and able to purchase the property
and causes him to meet the seller, h
is entitled to his commission, and if
sale is made, and the agent is th
procuring cause of the sale, ever
though the principal may have mad
the sale for less amount to the pun
chaser. the agent is entitled to hi