Podratz v. Nemitz
Supreme Court of Minnesota
In an action brought by George Gaulke in the district court for McLeod county to recover a commission for securing a purchaser for a farm, Kobert Podratz filed a complaint in intervention, demanding that plaintiff’s action be dismissed and that intervener recover $1,278.12 from defendants Nemitz. The facts are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
In an action brought by George Gaulke in the district court for McLeod county to recover a commission for securing a purchaser for a farm, Kobert Podratz filed a complaint in intervention, demanding that plaintiff’s action be dismissed and that intervener recover $1,278.12 from defendants Nemitz. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case was tried before Tifft, J., who at the close of the evidence denied plaintiff’s and intervener’s motions for directed verdicts, and a jury which returned a verdict against defendants for $1,293.03. From an order denying his motion for judgment…
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
George Gaulke sued Mary M. Nemitz and E. E. Nemitz to recover the agreed commission for procuring August Schultz as a purchaser for their farm.
Thereafter Eobert Podratz served a complaint in intervention, styling himself “plaintiff and intervener” and Mary M. Nemitz, E. E. Nemitz and George Gaulke “defendants.” In the pleading Podratz, hereinafter referred to as intervener, alleged a contract with defendants Nemitz of like tenor with the one relied on by Gaulke, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, and a performance by procuring August Schultz as a purchaser. He also alleged the pendency of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Alton v. MerrittSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
3Cited by1 opinion
- Alton v. MerrittSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920