Hughes v. Pacific Wharf & Storage Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWilbue, J.
Plaintiff recovered judgment in the lower court and defendant appealed. The judgment- was affirmed in Department and defendant’s petition for rehearing was granted. We accept and adopt the defendant’s statements with reference to the issues and evidence with certain exceptions to be hereafter noted. The statement is as follows:
“The action is to recover an agreed commission of five per cent on expenditures made by defendant in constructing a wharf and dredging a slip and its approach at Wilmington, in Los Angeles county. Plaintiff alleges that he was employed by defendant to superintend and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Evison v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Bassett v. FairchildCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Federal Asbestos Co. v. ZimmermannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
- McKay v. MyersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Brailsford v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1860
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Gall v. Union Ice CompanyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Hall v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1924
- Kiernan v. Union BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Rose v. HunterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Juen v. Alain Pinel Realtors, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.