Legal Opinion

Pullen v. Baltzer

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 5, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Courcy, J.

The first two counts in the declaration are for the recovery of a certain sum as commission for finding a purchaser of the capital stock of the L. L. Bates Company, all of which was owned by, the defendant, Baltzer. The trial judge directed a verdict for Baltzer on these counts; and the correctness of that ruling is not now before us. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on the third count; which is upon an account annexed for services rendered and work and labor performed. The main exception of the defendant is to the refusal of the judge to direct a verdict for him on this count.

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cadigan v. CrabtreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
  2. Noyes v. CaldwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  3. Leonard v. EldridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
  4. Ballou v. United Button Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Elliott v. KazajianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
  2. Bemister v. HedtlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
  3. Ball v. WilliamsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1957
  4. Haber v. Bond Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API