Legal Opinion

Smith v. Schiele

California Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1892No. 13621PublishedCited by 21 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion,

1Opinion of the Court

Fitzgerald, C.

Action to recover brokers’ commissions for negotiating a sale of defendant’s land.

Phelps & Smith were the brokers, and plaintiff, who succeeded to their claim, had judgment. Defendant appeals from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

*147The questions presented by this appeal for decision arise out of the following state of facts: On February 14, 1887, defendant executed to Phelps & Smith the following contract of employment: —

“ San Josi, February 14, 1887.
“I, the undersigned, do hereby authorize Phelps & Smith solely to sell the following real estate as…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Duffy v. HobsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Phelan v. GardnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Ex Parte McCarthyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Phelps v. PruschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Middleton v. FindlaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Gunn v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Coulter v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Sloan v. StearnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Jauman v. McCusickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Merriman v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

16 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