GREEN MEADOW REALTY CO. v. GILLOCK

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that summary judgment was improper in a dispute over a real estate commission and an addendum limiting the period for an excluded sale. The court concluded that conflicting evidence regarding the parties’ oral agreement and alleged fraud in the inducement could allow reasonable minds to reach different conclusions. It vacated the Court of Civil Appeals’ opinion and reversed the trial court’s summary judgment in its entirety.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was improper because the evidence permitted reasonable minds to differ about the parties' agreement, the realtor's agent's representations, and whether the owners were fraudulently induced to sign the addendum.
2. The owners' failure to read the addendum was not dispositive as a matter of law; it was one circumstance to be considered with the parties' other communications and conduct in determining whether fraud in the inducement occurred.
3. Summary judgment on all of the owners' counterclaims was also improper because the same disputed facts and inferences supporting the fraud-in-the-inducement defense were relevant to resolving those claims.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment was proper on Green Meadow Realty's claim for a real-estate commission when the owners presented evidence that the realtor's agent orally agreed to a complete exclusion, materially altered the agreement in the written addendum, and misrepresented that the addendum reflected the requested exclusion.
2. Whether the same disputed facts and inferences required reversal of summary judgment on the owners' counterclaims for breach of contract, fraud, and tortious interference.

Disposition

reversed