Legal Opinion
Schantz v. Ellsworth
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 16, 1971No. Civ. 10599PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KAUFMAN, J.
Plaintiff sued to recover $18,166 in real estate brokerage commissions allegedly earned by him as a result of procuring two- leases for defendants. The cause was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment was rendered for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
The Facts
The court found generally in favor of plaintiff and denied recovery solely on the basis that plaintiff failed to prove he was a duly licensed real estate broker as required by Business and Professions Codex section 10136. Specifically, the court found that “plaintiff procured leases for defendants with Goodyear Tire…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lewis & Queen v. N. M. Ball SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Latipac, Inc. v. Superior Court of Marin CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Gatti v. Highland Park Builders, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1946
- Koeberle v. HotchkissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Jauman v. McCusickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Thompson v. AsimosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Asdourian v. ArajCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Erwin v. Cotter Health CentersWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- Erwin v. Cotter Health Centers, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
- Preach v. Monter RainbowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.