Carrington v. Smithers
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County. Emmett Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. T. J. Butts, and Robert M. Ford, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The suit was for a broker’s commission for services in effecting an exchange of real property in Sonoma County belonging to defendants for four houses and lots in Berkeley and Oakland. That the exchange was made in accordance with the expressed desire and intention of defendants, that the efforts of plaintiff were the procuring cause of the exchange within the contemplation of the well-settled rules relating to such matters, that plaintiff was employed for the purpose mentioned and that defendants promised to pay him the amount claimed cannot be gainsaid, in view of the evidence disclosed by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Roche v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Muir v. KaneWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Balfour & Garrette v. WorleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Mohr v. RickgauerNebraska Supreme Court · 1908
3Cited by29 opinions
- Estate of RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- McCluskey v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Lawrence Block Co. v. PalstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Coulter v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Ayoob v. AyoobCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.