From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graham v. Crandall

Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division II
May 23, 1984
11 Ark. App. 109 (Ark. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion


672 S.W.2d 914 (Ark.App. 1984) 11 Ark.App. 109 Calvin GRAHAM d/b/a Graham and Associates, Appellants, v. Geraldine P. CRANDALL and Matthew L. Crandall, Appellees. No. CA83-171. Court of Appeals of Arkansas. May 23, 1984.

         Dan Stripling, Clinton, for appellants.

        David Smith, Bryant, for appellees.

[11 Ark.App. 113-A] SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

        COOPER, Judge.

        The petition for rehearing filed by the appellees points out one inadvertant error in our original opinion, 11 Ark.App. 109, 668 S.W.2d 548 (1984). It is true that Mr. Pike stated that he "probably" would have signed a note which was silent on the issue of prepayment, but that error in our opinion changes nothing.

        The point of the decision is that both parties had entered into an enforceable contract for the sale of the land in question; that Mr. Pike was in no position to demand any provision concerning prepayment; that the Crandalls were in no position to demand any provision concerning prepayment; and that the contract, at least on the record before us, appeared to be subject to specific performance by either party. As between the appellants and the appellees it does [11 Ark.App. 113-B] not matter that the Pikes and the appellees might eventually have been involved in litigation concerning the right, or the lack of the right, to prepay. The appellants produced a ready, willing, and able buyer who executed a binding contract for the purchase of the subject lands on terms which, according to the offer and acceptance, were acceptable to the appellees. Having done so, the appellants earned their commission.

        Petition for rehearing denied.


Summaries of

Graham v. Crandall

Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division II
May 23, 1984
11 Ark. App. 109 (Ark. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Graham v. Crandall

Case Details

Full title:Calvin GRAHAM d/b/a GRAHAM AND ASSOCIATES v. Geraldine P. CRANDALL and…

Court:Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division II

Date published: May 23, 1984

Citations

11 Ark. App. 109 (Ark. Ct. App. 1984)
11 Ark. App. 109
668 S.W.2d 548

Citing Cases

Dziga v. Muradian Business Brokers, Inc.

And in Whitfield v. Haggart, 272 Ark. 433, 615 S.W.2d 350 (1981), Justice George Rose Smith observed that a…

Whitten v. Harold Austin Cons., Inc.

That case has no application to the present facts as Mr. Maxwell has presumptively received his commission; a…