Legal Opinion
King v. Reed
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 2, 1914No. Civ. No. 1095PublishedCited by 10 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Calaveras County and from an order refusing a new trial. P. V. Wood, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
In this cause a rehearing was granted by this court for the purpose of giving further consideration to the question whether the plaintiff acted as an agent for both parties or only as a mere middleman in the transaction involving the sale of the mine referred to in the complaint. A general view of the case may be presented by the following quotation from the opinion filed herein, September 29, 1913.
“This is an action to recover the sum of $1,950.00, alleged to be due the plaintiff from the defendant for services in negotiating and consummating for the latter a sale of a gravel placer mine.
“The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Knauss v. Gottfried Krueger Brewing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Langford v. IssenhuthSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Clark v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- McLure v. LukeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1907
3Cited by10 opinions
- Anderson v. ThacherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Batson v. StrehlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Williams v. KinseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Skopp v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Hooper v. MayfieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.