## Facts

- A real-estate broker sought to recover a commission from a landowner based on an alleged written listing agreement.
- The writings consisted of (1) the broker’s letter to the owner referencing “960 acres in Dallam County” and requesting price and terms, and (2) the owner’s signed reply stating “The 960 acres in Dallam County is for sale” at “$225.00 per acre net to me” and indicating the broker should “add your commission on top of this.”
- The owner’s signed letter did not provide any survey, boundary, abstract, or other identifying data beyond “960 acres in Dallam County.”
- The broker conceded the owner’s signed letter, standing alone, did not sufficiently describe the land, but argued the two letters together constituted the required written memorandum because they concerned the same transaction.
- The land was later sold, and the broker sued for the commission under the Texas statute requiring a written, signed memorandum for commission recovery.

## Issues

1. Whether a signed writing describing property only as “960 acres in Dallam County” sufficiently identifies the land to support a broker’s commission action under the statutory writing requirement.
2. Whether the broker’s unsigned letter and the owner’s signed letter may be read together to satisfy the statute when the signed letter does not refer to or incorporate the unsigned letter.

## Decision

- The Texas Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the landowner.
- The Court held the description “960 acres in Dallam County” is insufficient as a matter of law to identify the land with reasonable certainty.
- The Court held the two letters could not be combined to supply the missing description because the signed letter did not refer to, incorporate, or otherwise connect on its face to the unsigned letter.
- Because the land-description defect was dispositive, the Court did not decide whether the commission language in the signed letter sufficiently stated an agreement to pay a particular commission.

## Legal Principles

- A broker may not recover a real-estate commission unless the promise or agreement, or a memorandum of it, is in writing and signed by the party to be charged, and includes the essential terms required by statute.
- The memorandum must furnish, within itself or by reference to another existing writing, the means or data to identify the land with reasonable certainty; a county-and-acreage reference alone is inadequate.
- Multiple writings may satisfy the statute only if the signed writing refers to the other writing or the connection between them appears on the face of the documents without relying on parol evidence to link them.

## Conclusion

The court denied the broker’s commission because the owner’s signed letter failed to describe the property with reasonable certainty and could not be supplemented by an unsigned letter that the signed writing did not reference or incorporate.


Owen v. Hendricks, 433 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. 1968)