McGavock v. Ducharme
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Lamb, J., presiding. Assumpsit by James E. McGavock against George A. Ducharme for broker’s commissions. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtKuhn, J.
The plaintiff in this action sues the defendant for commissions on the sale of real property. It is claimed' that the defendant had given him the exclusive sale for one year on a 3 per cent, commission, and had sold the property within the year directly to a customer secured by the plaintiff. The defendant requested the court to charge that the contract was void under Act No. 238, Pub. Acts 1913, which amends section 9515, 2 Comp. Laws (section 11399, 4 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] [3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11981]), by adding the clause, “Every agreement, promise, or contract to pay any commission for or…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Price v. HopkinMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Rice v. RuddimanMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
- Emery v. BurbankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Cargill v. PowerMichigan Supreme Court · 1850
- Abell v. MunsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- In Re Certified QuestionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
- Karl v. Bryant Air Conditioning Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1982
- Krause v. BoraksMichigan Supreme Court · 1954
- Smith v. StarkeMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Castorri v. MilbrandDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.