Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Robbins v. Crawford
Citations: 438 So. 2d 759; 1983 Ala. LEXIS 4834Docket: 82-498
Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; September 30, 1983; Alabama; State Supreme Court
An appeal was made from a Circuit Court judgment in Autauga County awarding Jack L. Crawford, Jr. $10,859 against defendants J.W. Robbins and Becky W. Moses for breach of contract, fraud, and bad faith. The court addressed two main issues: whether the trial court correctly applied the law in favor of Crawford and whether it properly awarded punitive damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision. Crawford, a Prattville, Alabama real estate broker, was engaged by Robbins through a multiple listing service contract starting August 15, 1981, for a 90-day term, with a 60-day continuation clause. The continuation clause stipulated a 6% commission for Crawford if a sale occurred with a buyer he introduced during the initial period. Becky Moses, informed of the house's listing, contacted Crawford and submitted a purchase offer on October 13, 1981, contingent on selling her own home by December 1, 1981. Despite the Moseses having their property listed, they failed to find a buyer before the deadline. During this time, Becky’s father, Grady Ward, also negotiated a sale with Robbins, which was contingent upon Robbins completing a new house. On January 15, 1982, Robbins sold the property to the Moseses, who had secured a buyer for their home that same day. Robbins claimed he was unaware of the Moseses’ intentions to purchase under the terms of his contract with Ward until the closing date. Subsequently, Crawford sought a 6% commission from Robbins, but his request was denied, leading to Crawford filing a lawsuit for actual damages of $7,359 and punitive damages of $100,000 for fraud and deceit. Both parties in the case reference the precedent set in *Foote v. Moore*, which establishes that a real estate broker is entitled to a commission if they procure a buyer who is ready, willing, and able to purchase during the contract's term, even if the sale does not conclude within that period. However, the broker cannot recover if the seller acted in good faith and had not procured such a buyer. In the current case, there was conflicting evidence regarding negotiations between Robbins and the Moseses. Robbins initially claimed to have discussed closing arrangements with Bill Moses before asserting he had no contact following the Moseses' inability to complete the purchase by the contract's specified date. Additionally, there were discrepancies about whether the Moseses had a buyer for their house that would allow them to proceed with the purchase of Robbins's property before the listing agreement's expiration. Despite testimony from both buyers and sellers denying any intent to defraud the broker, the trial court found sufficient evidence suggesting possible fraud, particularly given Robbins's employment by Bill Moses and the pricing dynamics involved. The court determined that the conflicting evidence warranted jury consideration regarding potential fraud or bad faith. The trial judge's decision to award exemplary damages was upheld, as the evidence indicated that the parties may have conspired to defraud the broker of his commission by agreeing to the sale during the listing period without proper disclosure. Lastly, the appellee's claim that the final order vacated the earlier dismissal of Bill Moses was rejected, as the directed verdict serves as a merit adjudication. Consequently, the judgment applies only to Becky Moses and J.W. Robbins. The trial court's decision was affirmed.