Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Boundary Gold Placers, Inc.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1938No. 26833. Department TwoPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlake, J.

Plaintiff and defendant Boundary Gold Placers, Inc., entered into a contract evidenced by the following writing:

“Mr. Pat Hughes Aug. 20, 1935

Seattle, Wash.

“Dear Sir:
“Confirming our verbal agreement this is to say that the Boundary Gold Placer Inc. will pay you one share of stock for each share you and your salesmen sell.
“Very truly yours,
“Boundary Gold Placers Inc. By J. Watts Phillips, Pres.

M. G. Phillips, Sec.”

Alleging that, pursuant to and in furtherance of the agreement, he had “organized an extensive sales force,” plaintiff brought this action to recover 22,160 shares of stock of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hamlin v. Case & Case, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Jensen v. SheardWashington Supreme Court · 1908
  3. De Haven v. TomerWashington Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Finnemore v. Alaska Steamship Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1942
  2. State Of Washington v. William R. PippinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API