Legal Opinion

Newbold v. Florance

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1950No. 5298PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COMPTON, Justice.

The present appeal is from an order striking appellant’s amended complaint. The original complaint contained two> counts; the first cause of action was on account stated and the second cause of action was based on quantum meruit. In substance, the complaint alleged that appellant was the procuring cause of the sale of oil; and gas properties, or interest therein, by appellee to the Wood River Oil & Refining Co., Inc., for a consideration of $250,000.00 and that the reasonable value of his services therefor was $12,500.00; that appellant and appellee agreed upon the value of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Paulos v. JanetakosNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Hudson v. Herschbach Drilling Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Tocci v. Albuquerque & Cerrillos Coal Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1941
  4. United States Ex Rel. Foster Wheeler Corp. v. American Surety Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1938
  5. Kraus v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Martinez v. Research Park, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Morris Ex Rel. Morris v. FitzgeraldNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Hambaugh v. PeoplesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Malone v. Swift Fresh Meats Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Honaker v. Ralph Pool's Albuquerque Auto Sales, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1964

5 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