Rogers v. Garrigues

Henderson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant, Arthur N. Rogers, sued Ralph A. Garner, National Home Building Company, Inc., and the appellee, Mary F. Garrigues, for commissions on the sale of property owned by the appellee in Baltimore City. Demurrers were filed by all the defendants, sustained as to the first two and overruled as to the appellee, who filed general issue pleas. The appellant then proceeded to trial only as against the appellee.

At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, the Court granted a demurrer prayer and took the case from the jury. The appeal challenges that ruling. The plaintiff testified that he was a licensed real estate broker in Baltimore City. About the 1st of November, 1944, Dr. Evan A. Gilkes asked him to look for a property suitable for a doctor’s office, and Jie submitted several pieces of property, which were not acceptable.

The witness learned from a tenant that the property 700 N. Gilmor Street was for sale, and that Mrs. Garrigues was the owner. About November 18th, he called her on the phone, and went to call on her at her home on Eutaw ⁵⁴⁶ Place. She informed him that she was anxious to sell and that she had given an exclusive agency to a real estate broker named Ralph A. Garner, and told him to get in touch with Mr. Garner. The witness phoned Mr. Garner, and was informed that the property had been sold.

The witness then phoned Mrs. Garrigues, who said she had not signed any contract of sale; when the witness told her he had a Doctor interested in buying, she invited them to come to see her. They did so, and after some general conversation she said she would be glad to sell to the Doctor, because she believed he would keep the property up, whereas if it were sold to a speculator it might be cut up into apartments. “Then she told me to take Dr. Gilkes down to Mr. Garner and to tell him that she would like Dr. Gilkes to get the property.” The witness and Dr. Gilkes called on Mr. Garner, and a few days later Dr. Gilkes accepted the property at its quoted price; Mr. Garner.drew an agreement, which was signed by Dr. Gilkes and by Mr. Garner, as the agent of Mrs. Gárrigues. The agreement recited that commissions should be paid only to The National Home Building Co., Inc. (the name in which “Mr. Garner trades”). The witness told Mr. Garner he would not subscribe his name to this agreement. “I’m putting you on notice I’m entitled to commission, I want my commission, and you are selling the property to my client, and I’m demanding commissions.” Mr. Gamer told him he would not pay him any commission.

On cross-examination the witness testified that when he first called upon her Mrs. Garrigues said: “I’m sorry you didn’t come a few days sooner, just yesterday, or day before, I put the house in Mr. Garner’s hands, I want to sell the house and sell it bad, you go see Mr. Garner, he is my representative.” He was then asked whether she said anything about paying the witness for a sale, if he made one; he replied, “she said somebody would get paid, because she allowed a commission.” “Q. You understood her to mean by that that she was going to pay a commission to Mr. Garner? A. No, I ⁵⁴⁷ thought possibly I would be able to