Jones v. Hanna
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court, and in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Thornton.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
The findings show that the defendant Hanna, while acting as executrix of the last will of Peter N. Hanna, deceased, procured an order of sale of personal property belonging to the estate. On the day of *508the sale she entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs that they should buy the property offered for sale “for her account and risk,” and advance the purchase price; that she would pay them two and one half per cent commission on the amount of the purchase, and five per cent on the amount of sales they might thereafter make. She further agreed to “ guarantee them against loss or damage,”…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Michoud v. GirodSupreme Court of the United States · 1846
- Dillon v. AllenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Swanger v. MayberryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Blasdel v. FowleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Porter v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Burris v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Strudthoff v. YatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Burris v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Bergin v. HaightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.