Byers v. Williams
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Calhoun; North, J. Assumpsit by Andrew J. Byers against William J. Williams for broker’s commissions. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
This is an action of assumpsit to recover commissions claimed to be due the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s bill of particulars was for services of plaintiff in procuring a purchaser, and acting as agent for defendant in the sale of his farm. In 1910 defendant *386was the owner of a farm of 100 acres located near the city of Battle Creek. He had listed the farm for sale both with the plaintiff and the firm of Marshall & Taft.
Plaintiff testified that defendant first spoke to him about procuring a purchaser about one year prior to October 22, 1910. Plaintiff listed it in his book as follows: “Williams…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hoadley v. Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Whitcomb v. BaconMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Ward v. FletcherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Dowling v. MorrillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Antisdel v. CanfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Farmer v. HolmesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
- Goodwin v. HallerNebraska Supreme Court · 1914