Legal Opinion

Walter H. Leimert Co. v. Woodson

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 14, 1954No. Civ. 19970PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.

Defendants’ objection to the introduction of any evidence on the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action was sustained. Plaintiff appeals from the ensuing judgment of dismissal.

The complaint alleges that prior to October, 1949, plaintiff had employed defendant Floyd William Woodson, who was a duly licensed real estate broker, to represent it in the acquisition of a parcel of property in the Norwalk area of Los Angeles County; that shortly thereafter, through the efforts of defendant, * plaintiff purchased Lots 224 and 225 of Tract 5348; that pursuant to their agreement,…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Quinn v. PhippsSupreme Court of Florida · 1927
  2. Stromerson v. AverillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Neet v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Sands v. Eagle Oil & Refining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Thompson v. StoakesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. King v. UhlmannArizona Supreme Court · 1968
  2. South v. WishardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. J. C. Peacock, Inc. v. HaskoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Spector v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  5. Teixeira v. DomingosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API