Legal Opinion

Goodwin v. Glick

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 28, 1956No. Civ. A. 8828PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPatrosso, J.

Plaintiff, a licensed real estate broker, instituted this action for the recovery of a commission in effecting a sale of defendant’s property, and recovered judgment for which defendant appeals. The determinative question is whether plaintiff is entitled to maintain the action. The facts upon which the answer to this question depends are undisputed and may be briefly stated.

Defendant executed a written agreement with Petros Realty Company, a licensed real estate broker, by the terms of which he appointed said company as his “sole and exclusive agent and grant said agent the exclusive right to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Eastland v. ManeyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
  2. Wilck v. HerbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Kinkead v. HartleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
  4. George A. Allsopp, Inc. v. HoneySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1946

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Colbaugh v. HartlineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  2. Steve Schmidt & Co. v. BerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  3. Hasekian v. KrotzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  4. Yates v. Bernard's Carpet and Draperies, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API