Moore v. Borgfeldt
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
BARNARD, J., pro tem.
This action was brought to recover for services claimed to have been rendered to defendant by plaintiff’s assignor, one Edward R. Hayden, as a real estate broker. The following facts appear from the evidence: The defendant owned an apartment house at 510 Stockton Street, San Francisco, encumbered by a mortgage for $40,000. Early in 1925 he stated to plaintiff’s assignor that he was desirous of selling this property. Although the agent had several prospects, he did not succeed in selling the property, and in October there was another conversation in which the defendant…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Toomy v. DunphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Twogood v. MonnetteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Kleinsorge & Heilbron v. LinessCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
- Kennedy v. MerickelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Patterson v. TorreyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Augustine v. TruccoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Beazell v. SchraderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Buckley v. SavageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Rader Co. v. StoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Herzog v. BlattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.