Jauman v. McCusick
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
The plaintiff sued, as assignee of a firm of real estate brokers, to recover one thousand eight hundred and fifty dollars, claimed to be due said firm for services in securing an agreement for the exchange of certain property in Imperial County, owned by defendant, for other property situated in Los Angeles County. The judgment went in favor of the plaintiff for the amount demarded. The de fendant appeals from the judgment and from an order denying her motion, for a new trial.
W. E. Stockwell, Y. E. Stockwell, and B. E. Jauman, the plaintiff, were partners in the business of real estate…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Duffy v. HobsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Gunn v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Phelan v. GardnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Armstrong v. LoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Phelps v. PruschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Lawrence Block Co. v. PalstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Glenn v. RiceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Sill v. CeschiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Jennings v. JordanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Lockett v. DrakeArizona Supreme Court · 1934
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.