Smith v. Lawrence
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion and exceptions by defendants. Assumpsit to recover $6,250 for services alleged by the plaintiff to have been rendered by him for the defendants in procuring a purchaser of real estate. Plea, general issue. Verdict for plaintiff for $2,750. The disposition of the case upon the motion for a new trial made by the law court renders a report of the bill of exceptions immaterial. The case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtEmery, J.
From the uncontradicted evidence and the evidence for the plaintiff, laying aside for the present the disputed evidence for the defendant, we think the following facts appear:—
Prior to February 1, 1902, Daniel W. Smith, the plaintiff’s father, was a copartner with Edward M. Lawrence and Elias P. Lawrence, the defendants, in a partnership owning and operating timberlands, lumber mills, &c., in Jonesboro, Washington County. Smith’s interest was small, only about $1250, while the interest of the Lawrences was about $34,000. On the date above named, February 1, 1902, the partnership being…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Barney v. Yazoo Delta Land Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Crosby v. ArdoinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- People v. . ScharfNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Bubar v. BernardoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1942
- Gerstian v. TibbettsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1946
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.