Firpo v. Murphy
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.
Action to recover a broker’s commission. The complaint recites that defendants became indebted to plaintiff’s assignors, Rucker & Tarp, a copartnership, in the sum of $770 for and as a commission for the securing of a lease of a certain apartment house.
The complaint was demurred to upon the ground that it did not sufficiently appear therefrom whether at the time the alleged cause of action arose, plaintiff’s assignor or its salesman, who handled the transaction, were duly licensed under and pursuant to the provisions of the act of the legislature regulating such brokers and salesmen, approved…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Levinson v. BoasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Gardner v. TatumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Buckley v. HumasonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Yount v. DenningSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
- Richardson v. BrixSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Loving & Evans v. BlickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Wallace v. ZinmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Wise v. RadisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Dow & Condon, Inc. v. Brookfield Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Holm v. BramwellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.