Legal Opinion

Haymes v. Rogers

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1950No. 5189PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DE CONCINI, Justice.

In our former opinion, June 12, 1950, 70 Ariz. 257, 219 P.2d 339, we held that as a matter of law there was bad faith shown •on the broker’s part which precluded him from recovery of his commission. In the light of the motion for rehearing and a re-examination of the evidence and instructions we are constrained to change ■our view.

Kelley Rogers, hereinafter called appellee, brought an action against L. F. Haymes, hereinafter referred to as appellant, seeking to recover a real estate commission in the sum of $425.00. The case was tried before a jury which returned a verdict…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Haymes v. RogersArizona Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Dillow v. City of YumaArizona Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Fornara v. WolpeArizona Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Leadville Mining Co. v. HemphillArizona Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Fink v. WilliamsonArizona Supreme Court · 1945

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Sidney J. Brown v. James R. Coates, Marion E. Coates, and Margaret E. BrownCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
  2. HTS, Inc. v. BoleyDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2013
  3. Hurney v. LockeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
  4. City of Phoenix v. HarlanArizona Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Vegodsky v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965

13 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