NICHOLAS J. MONTONE, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES R. BUSH AND MARGARET H. BUSH, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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.
A communication of withdrawal or revocation of an offer to purchase real estate to the principal's agent is generally sufficient, even if not communicated directly to the principal.
Appellant made a written offer to purchase realty owned by appellees. The chancellor found the offer was not effectively withdrawn because the withdra…
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 Revocation Of Offer cases and more on FLexlaw
The decree of specific performance, from ■which this appeal is prosecuted, is based, in •part, upon the chancellor’s finding that the appellant had not effectively withdrawn or ■revoked his written offer to purchase a ■parcel of realty owned by appellees. The chancellor held, as a matter of law, that .appellant should have communicated his withdrawal or revocation of the offer to purchase directly to the appellees, rather than to appellees’ agent.
The listing agreement authorized ■the broker “to sell the property” at the price •of $26,000 “or at any other price and terms acceptable to me.” This implies an authority to communicate an offer at a price or terms different from those in the listing contract, and, in fact, this is what occurred. Authority to communicate an offer to purchase carries with it authority to communicate a withdrawal or revocation of the offer.
The general rule is that where an offer has not been accepted by the principal, a communication of withdrawal, or revocation, to the principal’s agent is sufficient. 3 C.J.S. Agency § 265. We can find no reason for an exception to this rule in the case of real' estate brokers, even though they are special rather than general agents.
Had the chancellor entertained our view of the applicable rule of law, he might have found that there was insufficient evidence of the withdrawal or revocation as a matter of fact. For this reason we reverse the decree for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed.
SMITH, C. J., and WHITE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kendel v. Pontious, 244 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…re an offer has not been accepted by the offeree, the offeror may revoke the offer provided the communication of such revocation is received prior to acceptance. 33 Fla.Jur. 365, Tucker v. Gray [82 Fla. 351], 90 So. 158, Montone vs. Bush [Fla.App.], 167 So. 2d 884.” Affirmed.…
-
Wiborg v. Eisenberg, 671 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…did not grant his agent authority to approve it, then the Eisenbergs should be permitted to withdraw the request prior to its being communicated to Wiborg leaving the contract accepted as written without that terminology. See, e.g., Montone v. Bush, 167 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). Thus, we find that the contract complied with the Statute of Frauds and specific performance on the real estate contract was appropriately ordered. We affirm all other issues raised by Wiborg. On cross-appeal, the Eisenbergs co…
-
Borg-Warner Leasing v. Doyle Elec. Co., Inc., 733 F.2d 833 (11th Cir. 1984)…Russell v. Eckert, 195 So. 2d 617, 621-22 (2d Fla.App.1967). That Doyle knew Myers was an independent broker does not alter the outcome. A broker can become an agent when the principal creates the reasonable appearance of authority. Montone v. Bush, 167 So. 2d 884 (2d Fla.App.1964). In response, Borg-Warner argues that, even if the facts support a finding of agency, Doyle’s defense must fail because the record contains no evidence that Doyle relied to his detriment on Myers’ alleged representations. Doyle te…