Legal Opinion

Laack v. Dimmick

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 13, 1928No. Docket No. 5813PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRAIL, J., pro tem.

This is an action to recover a real estate broker’s commission arising out of the sale of real estate. Judgment was entered in favor of both defendants and the plaintiffs appeal.

On February 1, 1923, F. M. Dimmick individually entered into an “exclusive agency contract” with Laack & Williams by which they were employed for thirty days and until the agreement was canceled in writing to negotiate the sale of certain real property located at the northwest corner of Sixth and Westlake, in the city of Los Angeles, which real property the owner agreed to sell to such purchaser as…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Blackwood v. Cutting Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Blood v. La Serena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Russell v. RammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Harris v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  5. McDermott v. MahoneySupreme Court of Iowa · 1908

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Marr v. Postal Union Life Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Nelson v. Fernando Nelson & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Lathrop v. GaugerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Close v. RedeliusNevada Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Philbrick v. ChaseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1948

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API