Legal Opinion
Rogers v. Lippy
Washington Supreme Court
Decided January 9, 1918No. 13641PublishedCited by 25 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Pemberton, J., entered June 10, 1916, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, in an action on contract, tried to the court.
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
The plaintiff, Rogers, seeks recovery from the defendants, Lippy and wife, compensation for services which he alleges were rendered by him under the following written contract:
“Seattle, Wash., March 4, 1916.
“Commission Agreement. \
“It is hereby understood and agreed by C. H. Lippy and L. H. Rogers:
“That in case said L. H. Rogers furnishes a buyer or a party who will exchange for my stock ranch located in sections 9, 17, and 21, township 3, south, range 13 east, Sweet-grass county, Montana, for properties presented by him, I hereby agree to pay the said L. H. Rogers a commission of $1,250, on…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
- Broadway Hospital & Sanitarium v. DeckerWashington Supreme Court · 1907
- Langert v. RossWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Wetzler v. NicholsWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Gilman v. BruntonWashington Supreme Court · 1916
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Martin v. SeigelWashington Supreme Court · 1949
- Grammer v. Skagit Valley Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1931
- House v. ErwinWashington Supreme Court · 1974
- White v. Panama Lumber & Shingle Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1924
- Farley v. FairWashington Supreme Court · 1927
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.