Corvin v. Smead Investment Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.
Respondents brought their action against appellants for $2,000 alleged to be due them as a real estate commission on an exchange of appellants’ property effected through their agency. The answer of appellants denied generally the allegations of the complaint. It contained a special defense of fraud on the part of respondents in the execution of an agreement whereby appellants promised to pay them a commission of $2,000, and a further defense of the statute of frauds. The trial court gave judgment in favor of respondents in the sum of $2,000, from which appellants have prosecuted this appeal.
Th…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Coulter v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Johnson v. KrierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Cutten v. PearsallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rooney v. Vermont Investment Corp.California Supreme Court · 1973
- Herzog v. BlattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Sanstrum v. GonserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Martin v. ChernabaeffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Hillman v. KochCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.