Sterling v. Smith
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
In her complaint, the plaintiff averred that, during a certain period, defendant was her confidential agent in purchasing and selling real estate and 'in transacting other business for her; that as such agent and for such business he received from her, during said period, the sum of $11,920, or thereabouts; that during said period he j>aid out and expended for her the sum of $6,225, or thereabouts, leaving a balance of $5,695, with interest, due her from him; and for this last sum she prays judgment. The defendant answered,. admitting the agency as alleged in the complaint, but denied that he…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Burke v. BoursCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Colton Land & Water Co. v. RaynorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Curtiss v. SpragueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Canfield v. TobiasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Grangers' Business Ass'n v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Moore v. CoppCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Taylor v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Wenban Estate, Inc. v. HewlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Estate of ArbuckleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Wendling Lumber Co. v. Glenwood Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.