Legal Opinion

Dartt v. Sonnesyn

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 25, 1902No. Nos. 12,891-(42)PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Watonwan county, Cray, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtLovely, J.

Action to recover for services by a real-estate broker in effecting an exchange of lands for a stock of merchandise. The case was tried to a court and 'jury. At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, upon defendant’s motion, it was dismissed. This appeal is from an order denying a motion for a new trial.

The plaintiff was a real-estate broker at Minneapolis. He had advertised lands for sale. Defendant was doing business under the firm name of Sonnesyn & Co., and owned a stock of goods at St. James, which he desired to exchange for lands. He wrote plaintiff a letter, stating that he had been…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Raisin v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1874
  2. Johanke v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Turner v. FrybergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
  2. Lufkin v. HarveySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  3. Horrigan v. SaeksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
  4. American Security & Investment Co. v. PenneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  5. Inman v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912

1 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