Legal Opinion

Grant v. Mathis

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 6, 1923No. 14458PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMason, J.

The parties will be denominated here as they were in the trial court.

Plaintiff’s cause of action is based upon an alleged oral agreement between the plaintiff and defendant, whereby the defendant agreed to pay (he plaintiff one-half of all commissions made from the sale of mining property to purchasers produced' by the plaintiff. The plaintiff then alleges that he introduced to the defendant one Frank Shoemaker, who had consulted' the plaintiff relative to the purchase of mining propertied, and that the defendant sbld, certain mining property to the said Shoemaker for which he received a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Rogers v. BonnettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1894
  2. Smith v. HarrodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  3. McAlpin v. HixonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  4. Potts v. First State Bank of TalihinaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. Insurance Co. of North America v. TaylorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Maynard v. TaylorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  2. Dawkins v. People's Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  3. Reed v. Richards & Conover Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
  4. Curtin v. MoroneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  5. In Re Riddle's EstateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933

2 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