Legal Opinion

Graham v. Tuchtenhagen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 17, 1922No. 23,101PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.

Action to recover compensation for procuring a purchaser for the defendant’s farm. There was a verdict for the plaintiff.' The defendant appeals from the order denying his motion for a new trial.

On May 1, 1920, the plaintiff and defendant entered- into a contract whereby the plaintiff acquired the exclusive right to sell *423defendant’s quarter-section farm in Wright county for $33,000 net, he to have all above that sum as compensation. The provision as to price and terms was as follows:

“The price at which the said parties of the second part are hereby authorized to sell said premises is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Huntley v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  2. Flower v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  3. Van Norman v. FitchetteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  4. Goodwin v. SiemenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  5. Appleby v. DysingerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hare v. BauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API