Legal Opinion

Holloway v. Thiele

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 16, 1953No. Civ. 15385PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

Defendant, a real estate broker, returned to the buyer a $3,500 deposit on account of the purchase price of plaintiffs’ property. In an action for moneys had and received, plaintiffs recovered judgment for that amount. Defendant appeals.

Question Presented

Did defendant receive the deposit as plaintiffs’ agent?

Facts

Defendant as a real estate broker was a member of Multiple Listing Service, with whom plaintiffs had listed their property. The listing agreement makes the listing and the selling broker coagents of the seller and authorizes the latter to accept and hold a deposit from the buyer in…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Freedman v. Rector, Wardens & Vestrymen of St. Matthias ParishCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Baffa v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Russell v. RammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Bastanchury v. Times-Mirror Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Rutherford Holdings, LLC v. Plaza Del ReyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. Karras v. Title Insurance & Gauranty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1953
  3. Witt v. John Blomquist, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  4. McLish v. Harris Farms, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1980
  5. Lyon v. GiannoniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

2 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