Going v. Cook
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from District Gourt, Pierce County. Action by Charles A. Cook to recover the sum of 1150 as commission due him for effecting the sale for Clinton Going of a certain lot in the city of Tacoma. The lot belonged to one Goldsmith, of the city of Portland, who had directed the defendant, Going, to place the lot in the hands of Sawyer & Co., real-estate agents in Tacoma, for sale, which direction had been complied with.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Gourt, Pierce County. Action by Charles A. Cook to recover the sum of 1150 as commission due him for effecting the sale for Clinton Going of a certain lot in the city of Tacoma. The lot belonged to one Goldsmith, of the city of Portland, who had directed the defendant, Going, to place the lot in the hands of Sawyer & Co., real-estate agents in Tacoma, for sale, which direction had been complied with. The alleged employment of plaintiff is found in the evidence of conversation between plaintiff and defendant, which is fully set forth in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Anders, C. J.
This action was brought by appellee, against appellant, to recover one hundred and fifty dollars, alleged to be due him as commission, for selling certain real estate in the city of Tacoma, placed in his hands for sale by appellant.
There was no written contract between the parties; but *225appellee contends that be and appellant made the contract verbally, on the street, daring a casual conversation there had between themselves alone.
In support of this contention, plaintiff testified as follows:
“ Along about the 6th day of February I met Mr.…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Ringgold v. RinggoldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1826
- Kyle v. ConradWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1885
- Lewis v. Mason's Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia · 1885
- Jackson v. JacksonMississippi Supreme Court · 1855
- Knight v. YarboroughCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1826
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.