Legal Opinion

Cowgill v. Neet

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 9, 1953No. 16846PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Knauss

In the trial court defendant in error was plaintiff and plaintiffs in error were defendants. We shall refer to the parties hereto by name, or as they appeared in that court. Plaintiff is a Colorado real-estate broker, and defendants are real-estate brokers in Missouri. The active participant in this matter for plaintiff was Earl Neet, and D. H. Cowgill acted for defendants.

In his amended complaint plaintiff alleged that he and defendants entered into an agreement providing for the equal division of commissions on the sale of real estate in the event plaintiff would furnish defendants a buyer…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hafner v. HerronIllinois Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Sessions v. Pacific Improvement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Gleason v. NelsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  4. Allen v. First National BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1949
  5. Leonard v. RobertsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1961
  2. Hunter v. HayesColorado Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Winston Financial Group, Inc. v. Fults Management, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API