Legal Opinion
Leaman v. Rauschkolb
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided April 7, 1941No. 17501PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
A rehearing was granted in this matter because we entertained doubt as to the correctness of our original opinion wherein we held that the defendant, Charles Rauschkolb, was liable to the plaintiff for a commission for securing a purchaser for his real estate and that we could not consider in this suit the validity of his contention that the sale has never been consummated as a consequence of the fault of the purchasers because the latter have refused without just cause to accept title to the property.
The facts of the case are fully set forth in our original opinion. See 199 So. 663. However,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Boisseau v. Vallon & Jordano, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1932
- Mathews Bros. v. BerniusSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1930
- Guy L. Deano, Inc. v. MichelSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1938
- Dauterive v. West India Transportation Corp.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1925
- Clesi v. ThacherLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Clesi, Inc. v. QuaglinoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1962
- Doll v. RussoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1942
- Strahan v. WeilandLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1968
- Cox v. GreenLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1954
- Landry & Passman Realty, Inc. v. KeenLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1964
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.