Legal Opinion

Ekelman v. Freeman

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1957No. Docket 45, Calendar 47,153PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarr, J.

This action was brought to recover for services claimed to have been rendered in procuring a purchaser for real estate. Plaintiff’s amended declaration alleged that she was, and is, a duly licensed real-estate broker under the laws of the State of Michigan and, as such, authorized to employ salesmen. The pleading further set forth that defendants, being the owners of'real estate in the city of Cheboygan, entered into a verbal agreement with her for her services in finding a buyer for the premises in question, that plaintiff did so, and that as a result of her efforts the property was sold for…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Paul v. GrahamMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Smith v. StarkeMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Summers v. HoffmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Ordon v. JohnsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Blair v. AustinNebraska Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Diggins v. JohnsonAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Pine-Wood Ltd. v. Detroit Mortgage & Realty Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API