Mattingly v. Pennie
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order •denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.
This is an action to recover the sum of one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, commissions for the sale of mining stocks. Plaintiff alleges that by a written contract with Thomas H. Blythe, defendant’s intestate, he was authorized to negotiate a sale of said stocks for three hundred thousand dollars, and was to receive as his commission all that he could obtain for the stock above that price; that he procured a purchaser at the net price of four hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, who was ready, willing, and able to pay that sum for the stock; and that Blythe refused to make the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kauffman v. MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Gunn v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Emerson v. County of Santa ClaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Aguirre v. AlexanderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Wixson v. DevineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
- Herbert v. LankershimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Tally v. GanahlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Cox v. SchnerrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.