Legal Opinion

Malmstedt v. Stillwell

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 13, 1930No. Docket No. 7657PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This action was brought by plaintiff, as assignor of W. I. Hollingsworth and B. O. Miller, copartners doing business under the firm name of W. I. Hollingsworth & Co., to recover a broker’s commission. The assignors were at all the times herein mentioned duly licensed real estate brokers. The case was tried by the court; which found for the plaintiff, and judgment was entered accordingly.

Defendant, who has appealed, claims that certain of the findings are unsupported and that the court erred in its conclusions of law therefrom.

The facts established by the evidence were as follows: In…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Russell v. RammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Anglo-California Trust Co. v. Oakland RailwaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. McNamara v. SteckmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Wood & Tatum Co. v. BaslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  5. Freeman v. CreelmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Mountain Air Enters., LLC v. Sundowner Towers, LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  2. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Sequoia InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Edwards v. BillowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Elliott v. RichterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1973
  5. Meyer v. SelggioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

18 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