Legal Opinion
Menard v. Coronet Motel, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 17, 1965PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Per curiam
The plaintiffs brought this action to recover a real estate commission which they claimed to have earned in the sale of the defendant’s real estate. They now appeal from a judgment rendered for the defendant.
*711The finding of subordinate facts, which is not attacked, discloses the following situation: After the defendant had engaged the services of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs negotiated a contract for the sale of the property to James P. and Viola Peak. The contract contained a provision which is set forth in the footnote.1 Subsequently, the Peaks refused to complete the purchase, and the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Metz v. Hvass Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Richter v. DrenckhahnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Lesser v. Altnacraig Convalescent Home, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Eames v. MayoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
3Cited by12 opinions
- Harris v. Scarcelli (In Re Oak Knoll Associates, L.P.)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- Ditchkus Real Estate Co. v. StormConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Halperin v. Pine Plaza CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Bell v. Warren Development Corp.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1974
- Grillo v. HoweConnecticut Appellate Court · 1967
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.