Legal Opinion
Babcock v. Houston
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 6, 1973No. Civ. 13036PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
TAMURA, J.
Plaintiffs sued Pacific Island Village, Inc. and defendants Robert L. Houston and Louise Houston to recover real estate brokers’ commissions. Judgment was entered in favor of the brokers against the corporate defendant but not against the individuals. Plaintiffs appeal from that portion of the judgment adjudging that plaintiffs take nothing against the Houstons.
The findings reflect the following pertinent facts:
On October 22, 1968, Robert Houston executed a written agreement with plaintiffs Teal and Babcock giving them the exclusive right to sell lots in a tract known as…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Lewis & Queen v. N. M. Ball SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Associated Vendors, Inc. v. Oakland Meat Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Smith v. BachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Norwood v. JuddCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Tri-Q, Inc. v. Sta-Hi Corp.California Supreme Court · 1965
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Alexander v. Abbey of the ChimesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Tisher v. California Horse Racing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- City of Fontana v. Cal. Dep't of Tax & Fee Admin., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Schaffter v. Creative Capital Leasing Group, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Caveness v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.