Kennedy v. Merickel
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. H. M. Barstow, Collier & Carnahan, and John D. Pope, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtTaggart, J.
Action to recover commissions ■ for exchange of real estate. Judgment was for defendant on a nonsuit. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment, and brings up the evidence in a bill of exceptions.
Plaintiff is a real estate broker residing in Los Angeles City, and defendant a resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota. The latter was the owner of real property in "the last-named city of the estimated value of $175,000, which -he desired to exchange for ranch property in California. Through the efforts of plaintiff, an exchange for property in Riverside county, known as the Everest Rancho, was effected.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Toomy v. DunphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- McCarthy v. LoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Grant v. EdeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Merriman v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Lindley v. FayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Moore v. BorgfeldtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Johnson v. AllenUtah Supreme Court · 1945
- Franklin v. HansenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Smith v. BlodgetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- McCartney v. Clover Valley Land & Stock Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.