Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Arithson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1987No. Civ. 870043PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MESCHKE, Justice.

Gregory Johnson appealed from a judgment denying him compensation under an “agency agreement” with Donald and David Arithson. We uphold the trial court’s interpretation of the agreement and affirm.

Gregory Johnson agreed with Arithsons to procure oil leases on their land. The agency agreement said:

“Compensation to Agent, or party of the second part, is to be ten percent (10%) of the bonus paid to party of the first part by any Lessee solicited by party of the second part, it being the intent of the parties hereto that any offer sub mitted is to be assumed to be the result of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bismarck Realty Co. v. FoldenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Graber v. EngstromNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Thompson v. ThompsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Norden Laboratories, Inc. v. RotenbergerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Wilhite v. Central Investment PropertiesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. National Bank of Harvey v. International Harvester Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Madler v. McKenzie CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Moses v. Burleigh CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Minex Resources, Inc. v. MorlandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Schatz v. SchatzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

4 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