Property Asset Brokerage, LLC, v. Magna Assoc. Liquidating Trust: Colorado Court Finds Intent of the Parties Determines When a Brokerage Agreement Expires
In a recent decision, the Colorado Court of Appeals interpreted that state’s statute addressing when brokerage agreements expire. The parties before the court were Property Assets Brokerage, LLC (“Broker”), and Magna Associates Liquidating Trust (“Owner”).
The federal district court for the Middle District of North Carolina dismissed a lawsuit brought against a residential landlord (“Landlord”) by a former tenant (“Tenant”). The Tenant represented herself in this lawsuit. She alleged that the Landlord had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).
Landmark Commercial Realty, Inc. v. Developers Diversified, Ltd.: Florida Broker May Not Collect Commission From Ohio Transaction
A U.S. Court of Appeals decision from the Sixth Circuit, Landmark Commercial Realty, Inc. v. Developers Diversified, Ltd., involved a Florida real estate broker's attempt to recover compensation for brokerage services rendered in connection with an Ohio transaction. In this case, the plaintiff, Landmark Commercial Realty, Inc. (“Landmark”), is a Florida corporation owned by Robert Kurlander of Florida. Both Kurlander and Landmark are Florida-licensed real estate brokers.
Greenlee v. Rainbow Auction/Realty Co., Inc.: Broker Liable for Damages Resulting From Contract to Split Commission With Unlicensed Individual
In 1998 the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin ruled on the potential liability of a real estate firm and broker who knowingly attempted to avoid that state’s statutory prohibitions on splitting a commission with a nonlicensed party. Greenlee v. Rainbow Auction/Realty Co., Inc. In this case, Farmer & Merchants Bank (“Bank”) gave Rainbow Auction/Realty Company, Inc. (“Brokerage”), the exclusive right to sell a truck stop in the Bank’s possession. Rainbow broker Jon Schuster (“Broker”) was the listing broker.
East Kendall Investments, Inc. v. Bankers Real Estate Partners: Broker Entitled to Commission Where Seller Refused to Complete Transaction
A case from the District Court of Appeal of Florida addressed the issue of whether a listing broker is entitled to a brokerage commission where the seller refused to complete the transaction. East Kendall Investments, Inc. v. Bankers Real Estate Partners. In this case, East Kendall Investments, Inc. (the "Seller") entered into an exclusive right-to-sell listing agreement (the "Agreement") with Bankers Real Estate Partners, Inc. (the "Broker") in connection with an apartment complex.
A May 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes, involved a proposed development project by Del Monte Dunes Corp. in the city of Monterey, California (the “City”). The City rejected a series of development proposals by Del Monte, each time imposing more rigorous demands on the proposed project. Del Monte ultimately brought a lawsuit claiming that denial of the opportunity to pursue any development constituted a regulatory taking of its property without compensation.
Lee Hawkins Realty, Inc. v. Moss: Buyer Representative Breached Duty to Buyer by Failing to Confirm Existence of Home Warranty in Mississippi Case
A case from the Court of Appeals of Mississippi, Lee Hawkins Realty, Inc. v. Moss, involved the duty to ascertain for a buyer the existence of a home warranty. In this case, Philip Moss (the "Buyer") and his wife were moving to Mississippi. He contacted the real estate brokerage firm Lee Hawkins Realty, Inc. (the "Brokerage"), and met with one of its sales associates, David Anderson (the "Buyer Representative".) The Buyer explained that he only was interested in a home with a "2-10" homeowner's warranty policy.
Snider v. Oklahoma Real Estate Commission: Oklahoma Supreme Court Reverses Real Estate Commission Order That Certain Statements in “The Buyer’s Agent” Advertising Brochure Are False and Misleading
A June 1999 Supreme Court of Oklahoma decision set aside decisions from the Oklahoma Real Estate Commission (the “Commission”) and two lower courts that certain statements contained in an advertising brochure are false and misleading. Snider v. Oklahoma Real Estate Commission.
Brown v. Roth: In North Carolina, Providing Appraiser's Square Footage Measurement to Buyer May Not Be Enough
Brown v. Roth, a North Carolina Court of Appeals decision, involved communication of incorrect square footage information to a home buyer. In 1993, Charles Brown (the “Buyer”) purchased a home located in Huntersville, North Carolina from the Roths (the “Sellers”). The house was listed with a real estate brokerage firm (the “Brokerage”), whose sales associate (the “Listing Agent”) took property information from the Sellers and prepared the multiple listing form.
An unreported 1999 decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Ileka v. Lyons, involved the sale of a property in Chicago, owned by an elderly white woman (the “Seller”). In July 1997, she listed her home for sale with the real estate brokerage firm Erickson Realty and Management Co. (the “Brokerage”). Mary Small, a licensee affiliated with the Brokerage, was the listing agent (the “Listing Agent”).