Legal Opinion

Rosenfeld v. Miller

California Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1934No. L. A. No. 13819PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.

Plaintiff, a real estate broker, brought this action against defendant, a manufacturer of curled hair., for a commission, founded upon a written authorization signed by defendant, dated December 20, 1929, and purporting to authorize plaintiff to “negotiate for a tenant” for a *207period of thirty days. The property involved was owned by defendant and was a vacant lot situated in San Pedro, California. It was proposed to cause to be erected thereon, at a cost of not less than $220,000, a theater building, with stores and offices in connection therewith.

The authorization went into some detail as to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Zeimer v. AntisellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Twogood v. MonnetteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Moore v. BorgfeldtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Hicks v. PostCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Brown v. MasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ford v. Palisades Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1950
  2. Lederer v. MuirCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API