HomeMy WebLinkAbout0029 ANSTEAD, J.. dissenting:
I cannot concur in the result reached by the -
majority. This was an action for a broker's commission
in which the broker lost. The written listing agreement-
provided that it could not be revoked for a period of nine
months and further that it would continue thereafter until
notice of termination was given in writing.. The trial court
instructed the jury, erroneously I believe, that such a
listing agreement could "expire upon the lapse of a
reasonable period of time." In my opinion this constitutes
an incorrect statement of the law applicable to the facts -
of this case. See Reinke v. tdest, 303 S.W. 2d 419. (Tex. Ct.
of App. 1957). It is true that the appellees had other valid
defenses to the broker's claim that were supported by the
evi4ence. However, I cannot help but conclude that the jury
may well have found against the appellant on the basis of .
this erroneous instruction alone, which was specifically
referred to by the -court as the first defense of the appellees.
~~~o-~ ,~p~p~-
~~~TTRrtf~A.
~nF~~.
~
coutT
z
-
e
- X335 P~ 2g
s.
""~.:,f.,...