Legal Opinion

Bottorff v. A. E. Page MacHinery Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 11, 1933No. 24538. Department OnePublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

Bay E. Bottorff performed services for one year, under a written contract, as salesman for A. E. Page Machinery Company, a corporation, a dealer in tractors and other farm machinery and implements, the contract being dated May 1, 1928. He brought this action to recover the reasonable value of his services for making sales, during the time of the contract, of articles alleged to have been sold at the instance and request of the machinery company, which, as the plaintiff claimed, were not covered hy the written contract. The defendant contended that all such items were covered by the contract.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. LeDoux v. Seattle North Pacific Shipbuilding Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Ingram v. SausetWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  3. First National Bank v. White-Dulaney Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Schumacher v. MoffittOregon Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Kubey v. Coast Athletic ClubWashington Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Graham v. New York Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Paulsen Estate, Inc. v. Naches-Selah Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API