CROYDEN ARMS APARTMENT HOTEL CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
SEASIDE REALTY, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed judgment awarding real estate broker commission because the listing agreement was merely verbal and lacked essential terms for a complex hotel sale transaction.
A real estate broker cannot recover a commission when the listing agreement is only verbal and omits material terms necessary for a complex property transaction.
[1] A real estate broker's right to commission depends on a valid listing agreement containing material terms; a vague verbal listing agreement for a complex property transac…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This was clearly a complex transaction and many details concerning the sale had to be worked out by negotiation between the owner and any prospective purchaser; the verbal listing agreement here omitted these details.”
Court explaining why the vague verbal listing agreement was insufficient to bind the seller to pay commission.
Seaside Realty, a real estate broker, claimed entitlement to a commission for producing a buyer for a Miami Beach hotel owned by Croyden Arms Apartmen…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Listing Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final judgment awarding a commission to a real estate broker for allegedly producing a buyer ready, willing and able to buy certain property on terms specified by the seller. We have carefully and painstakingly examined the evidence in the record of the trial below to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to support this judgment. We have concluded after an exhaustive review of the record that no such evidence exists and reverse.
The fatal flaw in the real estate broker Seaside Realty’s case below is that it had only a vague, verbal listing agreement to sell a Miami Beach hotel from the owner, Croyden Arms Apartment Hotel Corporation. This was clearly a complex transaction and many details concerning the sale had to be worked out by negotiation between the owner and any prospective purchaser; the verbal listing agreement here omitted these details. When the negotiations for the sale of the hotel in the instant case broke down, the seller Croyden Arms Apartment Hotel Corporation was under no obligation to pay a brokerage commission. McAllister Hotel, Inc. v. Porte, 98 So. 2d 781 (Fla.1957), cert. dismissed, 102 So. 2d 727 (Fla.1958); Fenton v. Bancroft Hotel Associates, Inc., 265 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). The final judgment under review is, therefore, reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a final judgment for the defendant Croyden Arms Apartment Hotel Corporation.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McALLISTER Hotel, Inc. v. Porte, 98 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1957)
- Fenton v. Bancroft Hotel Assocs., Inc., 265 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Brewer v. MacVicar, 102 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 1958)
- Harlem, Jr., Inc. v. Mount Sinai Baptist Church, 102 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 1958)