This case involves the issue of real estate commission due under a listing agreement. Dover Realty Co., Inc. sued Arthur Pecce, Sr. to recover real estate commission it claimed Pecce was obligated to pay pursuant to a listing agreement. Pecce filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted, and Dover Realty appeals. We find no error. On appeal from the grant of summary judgment, this court applies a de novo review of the evidence to determine whether any question of material fact exists.1 Summary judgment is appropriate where the moving party can demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.2 A defendant meets this burden by “showing the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of plaintiff’s case. . . All of the other disputes of fact are rendered immaterial.”3
The record in the present case reveals that on March 6, 2004, Pecce and Dover Realty entered into a listing agreement to sell approximately 16 acres of land owned by Pecce. The agreement granted Dover Realty the exclusive right and power to sell the property, with the following stipulation: “Seller retains right to obtain private buyer provided no prior contact was issued by, or through any means of Dover Realty.” Sandra Thomas, an agent for Dover Realty, explained to Pecce that the stipulation meant that if Pecce obtained a buyer and entered into a contract he negotiated himself, he would not be obligated to pay commission to Dover Realty; Pecce was only obligated to pay commission if Dover produced a contract negotiated by Dover and signed by a buyer, at either the $18,000 per acre price or such other price and terms agreed to by Pecce, with the sale to that buyer being consummated pursuant to the terms of the contract.
