Legal Opinion

Feeley v. Mullikin

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1954No. 32573PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

— This is an action to recover a commission on the sale of an apartment house lease and the furnishings, fixtures, etc., that went therewith. The findings of fact will be accepted as the established facts of the case, and the question presented is whether, as a legal proposition, those findings support the conclusions of law and the judgment. As found by the trial court, the facts material to the issue of law here presented are as follows:

In October, 1951, M. J. Feeley was orally employed by Charles Mullikin and Jane Doe Mullikin, hereinafter called the Mullikins, to procure a purchaser for…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Grace Realty Co. v. Peytavin Planting Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1924
  2. Goodman v. Marcol, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1933
  3. Branch v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  4. Elmendorf v. GoldenWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Frink v. GilbertWashington Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bartsas Realty, Inc. v. LevertonNevada Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Willis v. Champlain Cable Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Roger Crane & Associates, Inc. v. FeliceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1994
  4. Syputa v. Druck, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  5. Leadership Real Estate v. HarperNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API