Legal Opinion

Turner v. Watkins

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 12, 1918No. Civ. No. 2114PublishedCited by 8 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court,

1Opinion of the Court

WORKS, J., pro tem.

This is an action for the recovery of a broker’s commission for an exchange of real property, under a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant’s intestate, W. C. Watkins. The plaintiff had judgment and the defendant appeals.

At the opening of the trial the respondent contended that the denials of appellant’s answer were insufficient to present a defense and asked the court to rule that the, appellant should go forward with his proof in support of certain affirmative defenses set up in the answer. The court ruled accordingly and the ruling is assigned as error. The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Phelps v. PruschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Humphreys v. McCallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  3. Purcell v. FirthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. May v. Board of DirectorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Brooks v. NelsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  3. Oregon Home Builders v. Montgomery Inv. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Aronson & Co. v. PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Curtin v. SalomonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API