Davis v. Pacific Studios Corp.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, J., pro tem.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered in favor of respondent and against appellant on account of a compromise agreement. The allegations of the complaint may be summarized as follows:
In May, 1920, A. W. Scott and Frank Burt were promoting the Golden Gate Cinema Studios Corporation and engaged plaintiff as fiscal agent for the sale of its stock, agreeing to pay him twelve and one-half per cent brokerage or commission “of the amount of all stock issued or subscribed for”; that plaintiff commenced preparations for- the sale of the stock, etc., but that before the…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Blood v. La Serena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Sessions v. Pacific Improvement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1922
- City of Venice v. Short Line Beach Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Brown v. Crown Gold Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Pacific Home v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Meyer v. Glenmoor Homes, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1966
- House of Rest of Presbyterian Church v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Marsili v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1975
- Todd v. Temple Hospital Assn., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1928
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.