Birch v. McNaught
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from District Court, Kingfisher County; C. F. Irwin, Judge. Action by George W. McNaught against Alfred L. Birch. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. cited: 23 A- & E. Enc. Law 906, 909, 921; Butler v. Baker, 17 R. I. 582; Wilson v. Mason, 158 111. 304; Mallott v. Downing, 39 Or. 218; Front v. Chisholme, 47 N. Y. Supp. 376; Hoyden v. Grill, 35 Mo. App. 647; Alvard v. Cook, 174 Mass. 120; Hegenmyer v. Magics, 37 Minn. 6.
1Opinion of the CourtTurner, J.
This is a suit by George W. McNaught, a real estate agent, to recover $161 commission alleged to have been earned on tlie sale of a farm for Albert L. Birch to W. P. Dates-man. There was trial to a court and judgment for plaintiff, from which defendant brought error. The question for our determination is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the judgment.
The material'undisputed facts are: That in the spring of 1905 McNaught was a real estate agent in Kingfisher, O. T. That Birch owned the farm in question near that place but lived in Saskatoon, Northwest Territory, at which time Birch…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lockwood v. HalseySupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
- Neiderlander v. StarrSupreme Court of Kansas · 1893
- Davis v. L. W. Lawrence & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1893
3Cited by9 opinions
- Roberts v. MarkhamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Gilliland v. JaynesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Nation v. HarnessSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- J. L. Lemmon Co. v. OppenheimerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- Wheelan v. HuntSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.