79 So. 83 | Miss. | 1918
delivered the opinion of the court.
On a former day the above cause was reversed, and judgment entered here for the appellant. It was then stated that the claim of appellee rested upon two propositions:
“First, that the real estate agent was given only thirty days’ option on the sale; and, second, that the agent was discharged when the appellee formally withdrew her land from the market; and as to the first propostion, all the evidence in support of it was purely hearsay.”
It appears that, after this time, Mr. Oscar Travis or his wife proposed to sell Mrs. Quick their place, situated near the Quick residence, if they should sell Mr. Blackman the property. This proposition was entertained, and the sale finally made to Mr. Black-man by Quick; Ferguson not being present and not participating in this sale. From Mr. Blackman’s testimony it does not appear that he knew. or understood that Ferguson had any interest or was connected in any manner with this sale. While the evidence to sustain the verdict in favor of Mrs. Quick is not clear and strong, still we think it sufficient to uphold the verdict. The jury had all the parties before it, and could determine the conflict between the evidence of Mrs. Quick and that of Mr. Ferguson.
Sustained.