Dreyfus v. Richardson
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County and from an order denying a new trial. Samuel E. Crow, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This action was instituted to recover compensation for services alleged to have been rendered by plaintiff for defendant in the sale of certain real estate.
Plaintiff bases his right to recover upon three grounds, each of which as a cause of action is separately stated in the complaint. The first cause of action is based upon an exclusive agency given plaintiff, whereby defendant in writing authorized him to procure a purchaser for certain real estate owned by her, it being alleged therein that plaintiff did procure two persons, to wit: Ellen G. Bothin and A. L. White, each of whom was ready,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sibbald v. . the Bethlehem Iron CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Dole v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Cone v. KeilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Golden Gate Packing Co. v. Farmers' UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Pehl v. FantonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
3Cited by12 opinions
- Houston v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Hicks v. ChristesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Ludy v. ZumwaltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- California Land Security Co. v. RitchieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Snook v. PageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.