Powered by Google

Search form

Hecht Realty v. Whisnant: North Carolina Court Reviews Elements of Procuring Cause to Resolve Commission Dispute

January 1, 1979: 

In Hecht Realty, Inc. v. Whisnant, the Court of Appeals of North Carolina addressed procuring cause in the sale of a home. The court held that the plaintiff, a realty firm which showed the house to the purchasers, which had knowledge of the vendor's listing with another agency, and which presented the purchaser's offer that was met by an unaccepted counteroffer was not the procuring cause of the sale.

Bastone v. Dial-a-House: Court Upholds Association's Requirement That Members to Submit to Arbitration

January 1, 1979: 

In Bastone v. Dial-A-House, Inc., the New York Supreme Court addressed whether Board members were obligated to submit inter-member disputes to arbitration. The court held that disputes between Board members required arbitration, and denied a request to stay arbitration proceedings.

ASREC v. ACREC: AffiliatePrevails in Trademark Infringement Suit

January 1, 1979: 

Note: This case is not published in an official reporter and may not be cited as authority. Consult with counsel before relying on this case.

In a 1979 case filed in Federal District Court in Illinois, the American Society of Real Estate Counselors, a NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (NAR) affiliate, brought a trademark infringement action against the American College of Real Estate Consultants. The court granted ASREC's motion for summary judgment and enjoined ACREC from further use of the ACREC name.

Van C. Argiris v. Pain/Wetzel: Disputes Between Association Members Required Arbitration per Agreement

January 1, 1978: 

In Van C. Argiris & Co. v. Pain/Wetzel & Assoc., Inc., the Plaintiff, (Argiris) sought a court order asking that a dispute between itself, several Board-member brokers, and the Kelly-Springfield Co. (a non-member broker) be deemed unsuitable for Board arbitration. The Appellate Court of Illinois held that issues between Board members required arbitration, but that disputes between members and non-members could be litigated.

Nystrom v. First National Bank of Fresno: California Court of Appeals Finds for Broker in Commission Dispute With Lienholder

January 1, 1978: 

In Nystrom v. First National Bank of Fresno, the Court of Appeal of California addressed a broker's claims for a commission on the sale of property which was in the possession of the bank. The court held that the letter agreement between the parties was enforceable and that the bank could not avoid liability because its own actions brought the sale of the property outside the terms of the agreement.

George v. Bolen: Kansas Court of Appeals Finds That an Agent Owes Fiduciary Duties in an Implied Agency Situation

January 1, 1978: 

In George v. Bolen, the Court of Appeals of Kansas addressed breach of fiduciary duty in an implied agency situation. The court held that whether an agency relationship arises expressly or impliedly, the agent owes fiduciary duties to the principal.

Glendale BOR v. Hounsell: California Appellate Court Holds Membership-Based Access to MLS Violates State Antitrust Statute

January 1, 1977: 

In Glendale Board of REALTORS® v. Hounsell, the California Court of Appeal addressed the practice of the Glendale Board of REALTORS® which denied non-members access to a multiple listing service (MLS). The court held that the Board's denial of access led to adverse consequences for non-members with respect to their ability to compete effectively, and was a violation of the Cartwright Act (California Antitrust Statute).

Brown v. Indianapolis BOR: Federal Court Rules Membership-Based Access to MLS Is Reasonable and Not in Violation of Antitrust Laws

January 1, 1977: 

In Brown v. Indianapolis Board of REALTORS®, the district court addressed the limitations on MLS access that required membership in a Board of REALTORS® (Board). The court held that the limitations the Board applied to MLS participation were reasonable and did not violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Marin Co. BOR v. Palsson: California Supreme Court Holds Board of REALTORS® Membership Guidelines Violate Antitrust Laws

January 1, 1976: 

In Marin County Board of Realtors v. Palsson, the Supreme Court of California held that a Marin County Board of REALTORS® (Board) bylaw which limited membership to persons "primarily engaged in the real estate business" violated the Cartwright Act (the state equivalent of the Sherman Antitrust Act). The court also ruled that a Board rule which denied non-member salespeople affiliated with a REALTOR® member access to its multiple listing service information violated the Cartwright Act.

Duffy v. Setchell: Contract Negotiated by Undisclosed Dual Agent Is Voidable; Specific Performance Will Not Be Awarded

January 1, 1976: 

In Duffy v. Setchell, the Appellate Court of Illinois addressed the issues of undisclosed dual agency and specific performance. The court held that a contract negotiated by a dual agent is voidable by a principal who did not have notice of the dual agency, and that the other principal will be denied specific performance.

Pages