O'Connell v. Casey

21 Citing cases

  1. Elliott v. Kazajian

    255 Mass. 459 (Mass. 1926)   Cited 67 times

    otowski, 251 Mass. 494. Williston, Contracts, §§ 60, 60a, 60b. Until a contract comes into existence the owner can withdraw the offer; and although the broker may have incurred expense, have been put to trouble and have spent time and energy in the effort to fulfil the conditions of the offer, he has no claim for compensation. Cadigan v. Crabtree, supra, and S.C. 186 Mass. 7, 12. Leonard v. Eldridge, 184 Mass. 594. Smith v. Kimball, 193 Mass. 582, 585. Willard v. Wright, 203 Mass. 406, 409. Clark v. Bonner, 217 Mass. 201. Ballou v. United Button Co. 241 Mass. 457. Marden v. Howard, 242 Mass. 350. Maksoodian v. Keller, 243 Mass. 249. Des Rivieres v. Sullivan, 247 Mass. 443. Bemister v. Hedtler, 249 Mass. 40. See McKeon v. Tyler, 254 Mass. 142. The right to revoke is not dependent upon the reasons which may lead to its exercise, provided that it is exercised in good faith, which here means for any reason other than to obtain the results of the broker's efforts without paying for them. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520. Leonard v. Eldridge, supra. An attempted revocation in such bad faith is in law no revocation. Cadigan v. Crabtree, 186 Mass. 7. The broker can, in such circumstances, recover compensation.

  2. O'Malley v. Markus

    339 Mass. 766 (Mass. 1959)   Cited 5 times

    1. The case against Markus should have been submitted to the jury for it could reasonably have been found that Markus in bad faith so interfered with the plaintiff's efforts as to prevent his performance of the condition of Markus's authorization to him. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520, 528-529. Leitner v. Foster, 280 Mass. 128, 134-135, 137. Winchester v. Erickson, 281 Mass. 210. Chisholm v. McCarthy, 325 Mass. 72, 74-75.

  3. Simmons v. Libbey

    208 P.2d 1070 (N.M. 1949)   Cited 10 times

    The agreement contained no special stipulation that the brokers' commission was conditional upon the making of an enforceable agreement between seller and customer. Harrington Co. v. Waban Rose Conservatories, 222 Mass. 372, 111 N.E. 37. `It is no part of the broker's duty to see to the making of the contract between his principal and the customer found by him.' O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520-529, 92 N.E. 804; Taylor v. Schofield, 191 Mass. 1, 77 N.E. 652; Willard v. Wright, 203 Mass. 406, 89 N.E. 559; Brilliant v. Samelas, 221 Mass. 302, 108 N.E. 1047; Leland v. Barber, 228 Mass. 144, 117 N.E. 33."

  4. Fortune v. National Cash Register Co.

    4 Mass. App. Ct. 386 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)   Cited 4 times

    Cadigan v. Crabtree, 186 Mass. 7 (1904). O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520. 528 (1910). Waters v. Pacific Wool Prod. Co. 268 Mass. 83, 87-88 (1929).

  5. Huber Hoge, Inc. v. Smith & Wesson, Inc.

    33 F.2d 923 (D. Mass. 1928)   Cited 2 times

    I have no doubt that, in the absence of any agreement modifying these rights and obligations, a principal may revoke at pleasure the authority of his agent, but that he may not by such revocation deprive the agent, who has fully performed his undertaking, of the fruits of his labor. Mechem on Agency (2d Ed.) § 1543; O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520, 92 N.E. 804. But in the case at bar the parties had seen fit to reduce to writing the agreement between them, in which agreement they not only expressly defined the rights of the defendant to terminate its relations with the plaintiff "at any time simply upon notification," but they also defined rather clearly the defendant's obligations to the plaintiff that would arise in the event of such termination.

  6. Leimbach v. Nicholson

    149 A.2d 411 (Md. 1959)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that broker was not entitled to commission where broker did not produce a purchaser "ready and willing to buy at a price satisfactory to the owners"

    The cases support the text. O'Connell v. Casey (Mass.), 92 N.E. 804 (Broker's offer $15,000 — price accepted $18,000); McCarthy v. McCarthy (R.I.), 142 A. 142 ($6,000 — $6,500); Holland v. King (Ga.), 33 S.E.2d 275 ($11,000 — $12,500); Cole v. Crump (Mo.), 156 S.W. 769, 770 ($60 an acre — $65 an acre); Flournoy v. Atlas Oil Co. (La.), 91 So. 714 ($185,000 — $200,000); Darnell v. Smith (Miss.), 76 So. 547 ($7,500 — $8,250); Goodman v. Marcol, Inc. (N.Y.), 184 N.E. 755 ($177,500 — $180,000); Murphy v. Linsky (Conn.), 109 A. 412. I read the Maryland law as in accord. In Howard v. Street, supra, 125 Md. 289, the broker's offer was $30,000, and eleven months later the owner accepted directly from the same prospect $47,000, of which, by agreement, $30,000 was allocated to the land.

  7. Malloy v. Coldwater Seafood Corp.

    338 Mass. 554 (Mass. 1959)   Cited 15 times

    This was a proper statement of the applicable law. Cadigan v. Crabtree, 186 Mass. 7, 13. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520, 527-528. Waters v. Pacific Wool Prod. Co. 268 Mass. 83, 87-88.

  8. Dragone v. Dell'isola

    332 Mass. 11 (Mass. 1954)   Cited 10 times

    Kerrigan v. Fortunato, 304 Mass. 617. Cohen v. Santoianni, 330 Mass. 187. The owner cannot act in bad faith, and that means that he cannot revoke the broker's authority for the purpose of avoiding the payment of a commission to him and then sell the property to the customer procured by the broker. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520. Glassman v. Barron, 277 Mass. 376. Leitner v. Foster, 280 Mass. 128. Palmer Russell Co. v. Rothenberg, 328 Mass. 477, 481. It was only when the defendant telephoned to the plaintiff revoking his authority that he learned that the plaintiff had been negotiating with Grande. Besides, it is difficult to see how the defendant could intend to defraud the plaintiff of a commission when the defendant had agreed to sell to Grande before he knew that the plaintiff had dealt with Grande. It is true that the defendant might have set up the statute of frauds if Grande attempted to enforce the oral agreement, but the defendant was not required to do so to avoid an agreement he honestly made to sell the property. His subsequent conveyance to Grande or his corporation did not in our opinion amount to bad faith upon the part of the defendant.

  9. Siegel v. Lowe

    327 Mass. 154 (Mass. 1951)   Cited 11 times

    But it could have been found that he did so only after he knew that Cohen had been interested in it by the plaintiff. Lowe could have been found to have acted in bad faith, with the design to avail himself of the plaintiff's services without paying him. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520, 528. Elliott v. Kazajian, 255 Mass. 459, 464. Waters v. Pacific Wool Products Co. 268 Mass. 83, 87-88. Brooks v. Gregory, 285 Mass. 197, 205.

  10. Gordon v. O'Brien

    320 Mass. 739 (Mass. 1947)   Cited 43 times
    In Gordon, the Supreme Judicial Court held that general authority to sell a property on a client's behalf could not be presumed from the fact that the parties' longtime attorney had sold another, unrelated property to a different party in a prior transaction. 320 Mass. at 741, 71 N.E.2d 221.

    54 Mass. 501. Hannon v. Schwartz, 304 Mass. 468. The fact, however, need not be established by direct evidence that she appointed him her agent to transact the business in question or that she admitted the agency, because it is enough to show that he was acting in her behalf and for her benefit with her consent and knowledge or that upon learning of his conduct she adopted and ratified it. In this respect the marital relation becomes an important factor in determining whether she knew and acquiesced in what he was doing with reference to her property. If she permitted him to act as her agent, then silence will not shield her from liability to those who dealt with him on a matter which she allowed him to transact for her. The existence of an agency between husband and wife frequently rests upon various circumstances and usually presents a question of fact. Arnold v. Spurr, 130 Mass. 347. Wheaton v. Trimble, 145 Mass. 345. Simes v. Rockwell, 156 Mass. 372. Reid v. Miller, 205 Mass. 80. O'Connell v. Casey, 206 Mass. 520. Groce v. First National Stores Inc. 268 Mass. 210. Frechette v. Thibodeau, 294 Mass. 51. Cobuzzi v. Parks, 315 Mass. 199. O'Brien managed the property, which consisted of a small five-story building, a portion of which was occupied by him in conducting a plumbing business.