Howard v. Chow

McCOMB, J.

From a judgment in favor of defendants after trial before the court without a jury in an action to recover a sum alleged to be due as a broker’s commission plaintiff appeals.

The essential facts are:

March 15,1937, defendants executed an instrument whereby they offered to exchange certain real property with the Mortgage Guarantee Company. This agreement contained a provision for the payment of a commission to plaintiff which read as follows:

“AND IT IS FURTHER AGREED with said H. A. Howard, that when he has secured an acceptance of the proposition to exchange the above described property on the above terms, we will then pay the sum of five hundred and no 00/100 Dollars as commission for services rendered.”

March 18, 1937, plaintiff delivered to defendants a letter executed on behalf of the Mortgage Guarantee Company reading thus:

“March 18, 1937

“Mr. H. A. Howard, Broker

‘ ‘ 3208 South Central Avenue,

“Los Angeles, California.

“Dear Sir:

“This will act as confirmation of my telephone conversation with you as of this date, signifying the acceptance of the offer for the property located at 4701 Central Avenue, Los Angeles, consideration for same being $5500.00 cash,

[757]

a first trust deed of $17,000 on the above property, payable $200.00 or more per month, including interest at 6% for ten years, and clear title to a property located at 3115 W. 76th Street and a property located at 1106-10 S. Central, both of Los Angeles. For this, this company agrees to furnish title free and clear subject only to the above mentioned first trust deed and all taxes, insurance, interest and rentals prorated as of the close of escrow.

“This acceptance is subject to the ability of this Company to deliver clear title to the parties later designated "in escrow.

“Cordially, J. D. Wallace.’’