A 1997 case from the Court of Appeals of Texas examined whether a broker earned a commission for producing a "ready, willing and able" buyer. Blackstone v. Thalman. In this case, Terry Blackstone listed his home for sale for $750,000 with real estate broker Nancy Thalman. Thalman found a potential purchaser for the home, Carl Lewis, who offered $550,00 cash, and wanted possession 48 hours after closing. Blackstone did not accept the offer.
Insurance Co. of Illinois v. Stringfield: Lead-Based Paint - Insurance Pollution Exclusion Does Not Prevent Coverage
For two years, a young child, Lawrence Willis, and his mother Gloria lived in a Chicago apartment owned by Katalina Stringfield (the "Owner"). The Insurance Company of Illinois ("ICI") sold the Owner a general liability insurance policy covering the property. Gloria Willis filed a lawsuit alleging that Lawrence suffered lead poisoning because he had consumed lead-based paint and plaster which had separated from various exposed surfaces of the property.
Salute v. Stratford Greens Garden Apartments: Landlord May Refuse to Rent to Disabled Section 8 Tenants - Not Violation of U.S. Housing Act or Fair Housing Act
This case involves two disabled individuals who receive Section 8 housing assistance from the federal government. Salute v. Stratford Greens Garden Apartments. Under the Section 8 program, the tenant pays rent of up to 30% of his income and the government contracts with the private landlord to pay the rest of the market rent. Participation in the Section 8 program is voluntary on the landlord’s part and a landlord lawfully may refuse to accept rental applications from Section 8 tenants.
In Thomas v. Daubs, the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed a lower court decision holding that business brokers involved in the sale of a landfill were not entitled to a finder’s fee since they were not licensed to engage in the real estate business.
A 1997 Appellate Court of Illinois decision held that a release contained in a Cancellation Agreement for Contract to Purchase Real Estate was unenforceable due to lack of consideration. Johnson v. Maki and Associates, Inc. In this case, Jeanne Johnson listed a house for sale with Maki & Associates, Inc. Johnson entered into a real estate contract (the "Contract") with a couple (the "Buyers") to sell the house, and Maki placed the Buyers’ $2,000 earnest money deposit in an escrow account.
In McCready v. Hoffius, et al., the Court of Appeals of Michigan held that a landlord who refuses to rent to unmarried persons does not violate the Michigan Civil Rights Act (the "MCRA") because unmarried cohabitation is not protected by that law. John and Terry Hoffius, a married couple (the "Landlords"), own residential rental property in Jackson, Michigan. In response to the Landlords’ advertisement, two unmarried couples inquired about renting the property.
PHH Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Mississippi Real Estate Commission: Federal Court Rules in Favor of Mississippi Rule Prohibiting Consumer Rebates
In PHH Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Mississippi Real Estate Commission, PHH, a large national corporation, sued the Mississippi Real Estate Commission (the "Commission"), challenging a Commission rule. PHH provides its clients with real estate and other services, often contracting with large corporations and other entities (the "affinity groups") to assist their personnel with the relocation process.
A recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision held that the real estate brokers were not a party to the purchase and sale contract between the sellers and the buyers and therefore were not jointly and severally liable for the award of attorney fees. Broderick v. McElroy and McCoy, Inc.
In the Wyoming case Fowler v. Westair Enterprises, Inc., the court considered whether an implied agency relationship existed. A sales associate affiliated with Westair Enterprises ("Westair"), showed a home to Charles Fowler. The sales associate, who was also the listing agent, told Fowler that he represented the sellers.
Jankowski Lee & Associates, et. al. v. Cisneros: Refusal to Provide Assigned Parking Violates Fair Housing Act
In Jankowski Lee & Associates, et. al. v. Cisneros, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that by refusing to reasonably accommodate a disabled tenant, the manager of an apartment complex, a corporation that partially owned the complex and the managing partner of the complex (together referred to as "Management") had violated the Fair Housing Act (the "FHA").