Legal Opinion

Palmtag v. Danielson

California Supreme Court

Decided August 5, 1947No. S. F. 17443PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

Plaintiff, a real estate broker, brought this action to recover a commission for the sale of defendant’s real property. Defendant sold the property to a buyer procured by plaintiff at a price lower than the figure at which plaintiff was authorized to sell. The trial court entered judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals.

The question presented on this appeal is whether the agreement between the parties was a general contract merely stating an asking price or a special contract calling for a purchaser willing to pay a net minimum price.

In April, 1943, plaintiff wrote to defendant to procure…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Estate of RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. McCluskey v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Haigler v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Backman v. Guadalupe Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1926

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Edwards v. BillowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Cline v. YamagaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Humphrey v. KnobelNevada Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Rose v. HunterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Teutenberg v. SchillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

18 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