Green v. Robertson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Amador County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The answer contained no denials, but averred that the plaintiff, while in the employ of defendant, as his agent, to procure a purchaser of his ranch, was also in the employ of Tucker, the purchaser, and receiving compensation from him; and that he concealed this fact from defendant. It claimed that, for this reason, the contract was contrary to public policy and void.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Amador County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The answer contained no denials, but averred that the plaintiff, while in the employ of defendant, as his agent, to procure a purchaser of his ranch, was also in the employ of Tucker, the purchaser, and receiving compensation from him; and that he concealed this fact from defendant. It claimed that, for this reason, the contract was contrary to public policy and void. The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMyrick, J.
This action was brought to recover judgment for four hundred dollars and interest on the following instrument:—
“Jackson, Cal., March 17th, 1882.
' “ I hereby agree and promise to pay unto William O. Green the sum of four hundred dollars, for and in consideration of services to me rendered by him in finding a purchaser and selling my ranch to John Tucker, when the said Tucker or his assigns pays to me the balance of the purchase price, to wit, the sum of twenty-six hundred dollars, and when such payment is made by said Tucker, then I agree to pay the said $400 to said William O. Green.
“James…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Batson v. StrehlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Williams v. KinseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Gardner v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Smith v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- McConnell v. CowanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.