Legal Opinion
Heinfelt v. Arth
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 4, 1935No. Civ. 1532PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.
This action was brought to collect a real estate commission from the defendant. The action was tried in April, 1932, with further hearings in May and September of that year. The court’s only finding was to the effect that the National Realty Company, a' copartnership, was not a licensed real estate broker at the time the alleged cause of action arose. A judgment for the defendant was entered which was reversed on appeal. (Heinfelt v. Arth, 135 Cal. App. 445 [27 Pac. (2d) 420].)
Thereafter, the plaintiffs gave notice that they would, on February 19, 1934, move the court to make and enter…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Tupman v. HaberkernCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Central Savings Bank of Oakland v. LakeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Falkner v. HendyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- In Re Estate of PuseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Monson v. FischerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- DeMirjian v. Ideal Heating Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. LagissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Rickards v. NoonanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Weightman v. HadleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.