Legal Opinion

Hartman v. Warner

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 18, 1902PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Action to recover for services rendered as a real estate broker, brought to the City Court of New Haven and tried to the jury before Bow, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $2.60, and appeal by him for alleged errors in the rulings and charge of the court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.

The plaintiff, a real estate broker, seeks by this action to recover for services rendered at the defendant’s request, in procuring a person ready and willing to exchange city property for the defendant’s farm in the town of Orange. In his bill of particulars he claims two per cent of $13,000, the conceded value of the defendant’s farm.

The finding of the trial court states that .these facts were conceded by both parties : In the spring of 1899 the defendant requested the plaintiff to find him a satisfactory customer for the sale or exchange of his farm, and on or about the 20th of April,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hoadley v. Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Blackburn v. Alachua County Broadcasting Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961
  2. Kuhn v. Bridgeport Ambulance ServiceConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API