Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Dysert

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided February 11, 1905No. 13,913PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error from Franklin district court; Charles A. Smart, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

William R. Smith, J.:

Dysert & Case, real-estate agents, brought an action against Johnson to recover a commission alleged to have been earned by them in *731making a sale of his farm. Defendant below denied liability and offered evidence tending to show that he never employed plaintiffs to make the sale, and, further, that one Blair, who bought the land, was induced thereto by a Mr. Baker, who alone was employed by the defendant as his agent to procure a purchaser. Judgment went against Johnson, of which he complains.

To support their case plaintiffs below…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hoadley v. Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
  2. Whitcomb v. BaconMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
  3. Gardom v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890
  4. Stinde v. BleschMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Marlatt v. ElliottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Beougher v. ClarkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909
  2. Baker v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  3. Jenkins v. BeachySupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  4. Williams v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API