Spielberg v. Granz
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtFord, J.
The question presented on this appeal is whether the evidence and the applicable law support the determination of the trial court that the plaintiff acted as a real estate broker in the transaction out of which the present action arose and, not having been licensed as such broker, he could not prevail as against the defendant Edward M. Granz.
In the first cause of action of his first amended complaint, the appellant alleged that by an agreement in writing the respondent Edward M. Granz gave him the right and option to purchase from that respondent, on or before September 1, 1955, certain real…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
- Bancroft-Whitney Co. v. McHughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Freeman v. JerginsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Tatterson v. KehrleinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Tenzer v. Superscope, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1985
- Tyrone v. KelleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Dietrich v. Texas National Petroleum Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1963
- Rees v. Department of Real EstateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Charles B. Webster Real Estate v. RickardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.