Legal Opinion

Hare v. Bauer

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 28, 1947No. 34,296PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Thomas Gallagher, Justice.

Plaintiff seeks to recover $á00 commission on the sale of certain real property belonging to defendants, and, in addition, the sum of $200 earnest money advanced by him to defendants on behalf of a prospective purchaser of their property.

The trial court found that no sale had been consummated; that no purchaser ready, willing, and able to purchase defendants’ premises had been procured; and that the $200 sum advanced by plaintiff to defendants had been paid into district court by defendants and was held there pending proof of its ownership. Plaintiff later dismissed…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Francis v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  2. McDonald v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  3. Goss v. StevensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
  4. Meyer v. Keating Land & Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  5. Martinson v. HenslerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lake Company v. MolanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
  2. Fulsom v. EgnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  3. White v. BoucherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Bailie v. RidkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  5. Wold v. PattersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949

2 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