Farrar v. Romer & Co.

Macgii,!,, J., by special assignment, delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a judgment entered on a jury’s verdict against the property owners and in favor of a real estate broker for a commission on an unconsummated sale of real estate. The facts, although disputed, are not complicated. The appellants, Mr. and Mrs. Farrar, who owned a farm in Montgomery County, planned to sell it and move to Arizona.

They listed it, on a non-exclusive listing, with the appellees, at a sales price of $39,500.00. Buyers were not interested at that price and later, according to the appellee, Mr. Allen K. Romer, the appellants authorized a reduction in the asking price to $37,500.00. The appellants secured a purchaser at the reduced price and Mr. Romer took the sales contract, which had been executed by the purchaser, to the appellants. He testified that they then raised, for the first time, the question of an agreement which they had previously executed for the sale of certain timber on the property.

There was also some discussion about the possibility of a settlement date earlier than that provided for in the contract. Mr. and Mrs. Farrar, however, did not reject the contract but told Mr. Romer that they would straighten out the matter of the timber cutting and come to his office later that day and sign the contract. Instead of doing so, they signed a contract that evening, which had been subsequently produced by another broker and which provided somewhat more favorable terms as to the price and settlement date. Mr. Farrar testified that he mentioned the timber-cutting agreement to Mr. Romer when he first listed the farm with the latter’s organization.

He denied that he later authorized a reduction in the asking price from $39,500.00 to $37,500.00, although he admitted that there was some discussion with Mr. Romer about the possibility of having to sell at a lower figure. He and his wife did not sign the contract produced by Mr. Romer