Legal Opinion
Mott v. Minor
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 16, 1909No. Civ. No. 660PublishedCited by 13 opinions
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Humboldt County, denying a new trial. G. W. Hunter, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The cause, involving a broker’s commission for securing a purchaser for timber land, was tried before a jury and a general verdict was rendered in favor of defendant. The appeal is from an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.
The written instrument which, it is claimed, created the agency is in the form of a letter signed by defendant and in the following language:
“San Francisco, Cal., July 27th, 1903.
“Chas. W. Mott, Esq., San Francisco, Calif.
“Dear Sir: I own about 20,000 acres of sugar and yellow pine land (more or less) situated in Tuolumne County, California, and being located…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mattingly v. PennieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Gunn v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Hayden v. GrilloMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Landis v. MorrisseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Heaton-Hobson Associated Law Offices v. ArperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hicks v. ChristesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Mann v. MuellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Clements v. RankinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Contant v. WallaceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Edwards v. LairdCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.