Legal Opinion
Sutliff v. E. Seidenberg, Stiefel, & Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided February 27, 1901No. S.F. No. 1660PublishedCited by 22 opinions
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a new trial. John Hunt, Judge. The f^Lcts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff, assignee of Charles J. Simon, brought the action against defendants for services rendered and commisisons earned by said Simon under the following contract: —
SAN FRANCISCO, June 16, 1894.
"In consideration of Mr. Charles J. Simon assisting our distributing agents, Messrs. Adelsdorfer and Brandenstein, to make a success of our line of cigars in San Francisco and other territories allowed as per contract with Adelsdorfer and Brandenstein, and for all services necessary to represent our interest, we agree to pay Mr. Simon five (5) per cent commission on all sales made in California and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gilmore v. Lycoming Fire Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by22 opinions
- California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Long Beach Drug Co. v. United Drug Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
- Roy v. SalisburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Bohman v. BergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- McIllmoil v. Frawley Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.