Procuring Cause

196 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Esslinger-Wooten-Maxwell, Inc. v. Lones Fam. Ltd. P'ship
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-01-29
  The appellate court affirmed a summary judgment for the seller, finding that a real estate broker was not entitled to a commission on a sale that occurred years after the listing agreement expired. The court held that the "procuring cause doctrine" did not apply because the listi
• Lones Fam. Ltd. P'ship v. World Bus. Broker, Inc.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-01-29
  The appellate court affirmed a summary judgment for the property owners, ruling that a brokerage commission was not owed. The court held that the procuring cause doctrine did not apply to an express listing agreement with a specific protection period, especially when the sale occ
• Lovell v. Perez
  258 So. 3d 542· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-10-31
  A real estate indemnification clause requiring sellers to indemnify buyers for broker commissions claimed under a listing agreement with the sellers does not require buyers to indemnify sellers for the sellers' own wrongful failure to pay their broker, even if that broker was a p
• GMI, LLC v. ASOCIACIÓN DEL FÚTBOL Argentino
  193 So. 3d 60· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-05-04
  GMI sued AFA for breach of contract and related claims, alleging it was owed compensation for procuring a sale of AFA's football media rights to Argentine government entities. The court affirmed dismissal of the action, finding that the Republic of Argentina is an indispensable p
• Associated Leasing Int'l Corp. v. Alpha Cap. Servs., Inc.
  992 So. 2d 283· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-09-03
  A aircraft broker (Casserly) sued another company (Associated Leasing) for commissions on aircraft financing deals under an implied contract theory, claiming he had conferred a benefit on Associated through earlier work on a different aircraft transaction. The court reversed the
• Westship World Yachts, LLC v. Reel Deal Yachts, Inc.
  970 So. 2d 354· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-09-26
  A Florida appellate court reversed a jury verdict awarding a yacht broker a commission on a vessel sale, holding that the broker failed to establish it was the procuring cause of the transaction. The court concluded the sale would have occurred through direct contact between the
• Duncan v. BAY Realty OF Englewood, Inc.
  792 So. 2d 548· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-07-11
  The court held that the commission agreement was ambiguous and summary judgment was improperly granted because material issues of fact remained regarding the broker's entitlement to a commission.
• Cushman & Wakefield OF Fla., Inc. v. Schaecter
  708 So. 2d 601· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-02-11
  A real estate broker is entitled to its commission if it was the procuring cause of the transaction, even if the seller lacked knowledge of the buyer's identity during negotiations.
• Riteway Real Est., Inc. v. Bentley Ocean View, Inc.
  659 So. 2d 1194· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-08-23
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to state a cause of action for tortious interference with a contract, and thus the dismissal of the amended complaint was improper.
• Bodon Indus., Inc. v. Brown
  645 So. 2d 33· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-10-21
  Bodon Industries (buyer) appealed a judgment requiring it to indemnify the seller for a $100,000 broker's commission awarded to two real estate brokers. The court reversed, holding that the indemnity clause in the sales contract did not apply because the commission resulted from
• Johnson Grp., Inc. v. Beecham, Inc.
  952 F.2d 1005· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-26
  The court affirmed the jury's award of damages for real estate broker fees, finding substantial evidence supported the jury's factual findings on procuring cause and quantum meruit.
• Price v. Highland Cmty. Bank & George R. Brokemond
  932 F.2d 601· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-03
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the jury's findings of breach of contract and fraud were supported by sufficient evidence, and the damages awarded were not excessive.
• Kingsley Assocs., Inc. v. Del-Met, Inc.
  918 F.2d 1277· 6th Cir.· 1990-11-20
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on post-termination commissions because sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that the parties' oral agreement entitled the representative to commissions for the "life of the
• Grubb & Ellis Co. v. Bradley Real Est. Tr.
  909 F.2d 1050· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-09
  The court held that the agency agreement unambiguously entitled the broker to a commission on a sale that occurred during the agency term, regardless of whether the broker procured the sale.
• Sheldon Greene & Assocs., Inc. v. Roz Belford
  552 So. 2d 1161· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-11-07
  The court affirmed a trial court's declaratory judgment awarding a 50/50 split of disputed brokerage commission between two real estate brokers, finding substantial evidence that both were procuring causes and had agreed to the split.
• Stadler Commercial Real Est. Servs., Inc. v. Indus. Waste Servs., Inc.
  519 So. 2d 739· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-02-09
  A real estate broker who disclosed confidential information about a business sale to another broker, which was then passed along through intermediaries to the ultimate buyer, was not the procuring cause of the sale and therefore not entitled to a commission.
• Maglione Realty, Inc. v. Votrian
  509 So. 2d 1384· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-07-24
  A summary judgment is improper if the evidence, even if uncontradicted, is susceptible of conflicting inferences regarding whether a sale was deferred to avoid paying a broker's commission.
• Tam-Bay Realty, Inc. v. Casper
  506 So. 2d 1069· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-04-08
  The court reversed summary judgment for the seller and buyer in a broker's commission dispute, holding that conflicting evidence on whether an oral contract existed between the broker and seller precluded summary judgment.
• Info. Exch., Inc. v. Alligator Point Campground, Inc.
  498 So. 2d 624· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-12-08
  A real estate broker is entitled to a commission when their continuous negotiations, even if indirect, lead to a sale, and the undisputed facts did not establish the broker was not entitled to a commission.
• WTSP-TV, Inc. v. No. ONE Realty Ctr., Inc.
  490 So. 2d 1273· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-05-28
  WTSP-TV appeals from an order awarding a real estate commission to Number One Realty Center, which had an exclusive listing agreement to sell WTSP's property. The court affirmed the award to Number One based on the procuring cause doctrine, rejecting the trial court's unjust enri
• Follman Props. Co. v. Daly
  790 F.2d 57· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-09
  The court held that the broker was entitled to a commission under the nonexclusive listing agreement because they procured a buyer, and the trustees were individually liable for the commission.
• Gelfand v. Horizon Corp.
  675 F.2d 1108· 10th Cir.· 1982-04-12
  The court held that a fiduciary can be held accountable for profits made by third parties due to a breach of fiduciary duty, but the decision to order such restitution is discretionary. The court also affirmed the trial court's determination of commission owed to the employee.
• Higgenbotham Realty, Inc. v. Brock
  395 So. 2d 642· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-03-25
  The court affirmed the trial court's finding that a real estate broker was the procuring cause of a sale and entitled to a ten percent commission, but reversed and remanded to add prejudgment interest to the award.
• Christo v. Ramada Inns, Inc.
  609 F.2d 1058· 3d Cir.· 1979-11-20
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find in favor of Christo on his claim against Ramada, but the jury instructions were erroneous, requiring a new trial.
• Galvin v. D. B. Tyler & Assocs., Inc.
  326 So. 2d 457· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-02-13
• TEC Corp. v. Nuclear Dynamics, Inc.
  518 F.2d 1286· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-01
  The court held that the Appellants were not entitled to a commission because the conditions of their agreement were not met and the Appellee did not act in bad faith to circumvent the commission.
• Marmon v. Decker Realty & Ins. Co.
  313 So. 2d 132· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-05-23
  A real estate broker is entitled to a commission when they bring the seller and ultimate purchasers together, and the property is subsequently sold on similar terms, even if the formal contract expires.
• Myer Frank v. Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Pepin
  283 So. 2d 389· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-10-05
  Frank sued the Pepins for a brokerage commission on a loan transaction, claiming he was the procuring cause of Prudential's loan commitment. The trial court granted summary judgment against Frank, but the appellate court reversed, finding that the trial judge improperly resolved
• AL J. Goodman & Co. v. Bucyrus Erie Co.
  469 F.2d 1274· 7th Cir.· 1972-11-21
  The court held that the district judge was not clearly in error in finding that the September 9, 1964 conversation did not create an exclusive oral brokerage contract.
• The Keyes Co. v. The Island FOX Motel, Inc.
  260 So. 2d 894· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-04-14
  A real estate broker sued both the seller and buyer of a property to recover a commission, claiming it procured a binding contract or presented a ready, willing, and able buyer, but the transaction failed to close. The trial court granted summary judgment for both defendants, but
• Simon v. MacKlin
  258 So. 2d 486· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-29
  A real estate broker (Simon) sued to recover a commission from a property owner (Macklin) after the owner withdrew the property from the market. The court affirmed judgment for the defendant, holding that the broker failed to present a contract meeting the owner's specific terms
• Gil Grady v. de Ville Motor Hotel, Inc.
  415 F.2d 449· 10th Cir.· 1969-09-04
  A broker is not entitled to a commission when the buyer's offer, made at a price less than the owner's asking price, is conditioned on the owner's timely acceptance and the buyer's ability to secure financing, and these conditions are not met.
• Benada Aluminum Prods. Co. v. Blumenthal
  221 So. 2d 207· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-04-01
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding that the plaintiff broker was the procuring cause of the sale.
• Cmty. Cablecasting Corp. v. Daniels & Assocs., Inc.
  215 So. 2d 17· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-09-19
  This case involves an appeal from a summary judgment awarding a brokerage commission on the sale of a company's assets, where the broker had an exclusive agency contract.
• Futch v. Ball
  161 So. 2d 238· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-03-03
  This case involves a claim for a real estate commission and a conspiracy to defraud. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of claims against the purchaser, selling broker, and salesman, and affirmed the summary judgment for the seller, finding no error in either decision.
• Willis v. Blair G. Clark
  135 So. 2d 260· Fla. 2d DCA· 1961-11-15
  A broker earns a commission by producing a ready, willing, and able buyer on the owner's terms, and is entitled to it even if the sale is not consummated due to the principal's fault.
• Monroe W. Abels v. Iceland Prods., Inc.
  274 F.2d 213· 7th Cir.· 1960-01-28
  A broker is entitled to commissions on sales that were in the process of being contracted or consummated at the time of their separation from the principal, even if formal orders are placed after termination.
• Folwell v. Grote
  11 Fla. Supp. 92· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1957-08-22
  Folwell appeals a judgment awarding him a $2,240 real estate broker's commission against the Grotes. The court reversed, holding that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support a verdict for the broker because the buyer's deposit never met the defendants' require
• Murray v. Frederic N. Towers
  239 F.2d 914· D.C. Cir.· 1956-11-15
  The court held that the appellant failed to produce a customer ready, willing, and able to buy the business on acceptable terms, and also failed to establish an exclusive agency that would preclude the appellees from selling the business themselves.
• Darracott v. Hemphill
  82 So. 2d 719· Fla.· 1955-11-16
  A real estate broker sued for a commission after owners refused to pay when they sold 15 acres to a school board. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the owners, holding that the broker did not procure the sale because negotiations had ceased and the transacti
• Woodward v. Dumar Constr. Co.
  7 Fla. Supp. 157· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1955-04-11
  The court held that the plaintiff presented a prima facie case for a broker's commission, and the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant.
• Woodward v. Mickelberry
  1 Fla. Supp. 61· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1948-08-23
  A real estate broker sought commission on a land sale, claiming he procured the purchaser through an initial lessee who held an option to buy. The court reversed the trial court's judgment, holding that the broker made a prima facie case that he was the procuring cause of the sal
• Straus v. Spiegel, Inc.
  153 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1946-01-24
  A real estate broker cannot recover a commission from a seller if the broker appeared as the buyer's agent and did not obtain the seller's knowledge and consent to act as a dual agent.
• Alder v. Consumers Co.
  152 F.2d 696· 7th Cir.· 1945-12-20
  The court held that the trial court's findings of fact regarding procuring cause and accord and satisfaction were supported by substantial evidence, but reversed the award of interest.
• Jackson v. Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  133 F.2d 111· 4th Cir.· 1943-02-11
  A broker is not entitled to a commission for unsuccessful efforts, and a principal is not bound by an agent's acts exceeding actual authority if the third party knows the limits of that authority.
• Stowers v. Wm. M. McGriff
  70 Fla. 263· Fla.· 1915-11-04
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for a plaintiff who sued for a real estate commission, finding that the evidence presented did not sufficiently prove he procured a buyer for the property.