Legal Opinion

Koffel v. Rhud

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 27, 1922PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Statement.

BboNSON, J.

This is an action to recover a broker’s commission. The jury returned a verdict for $2,000 in plaintiff’s favor. Defendant has appealed from the judgment and from an order denying judgment *196non obstante or, in tbe alternative, for a new trial. In a motion to dismiss the appeal plaintiff has presented several questions of practice. In view of the determination upon the merits, it is unnecessary to give consideration to these questions. The facts are: Pursuant to Koffel’s testimony, the defendant, in March, 1920, came to his office in Bismarck and wanted him to procure a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Paulson v. ReedsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Harris v. Van VrankenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Farmer v. HolmesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Minder & Jorgenson Land Co. v. BrustuenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Ball v. DolanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dardis v. Eddy BrothersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Neff v. SchraderNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Dardis v. Eddy BrothersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API