Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Collins

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 27, 1923No. 23,340PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.

Action to recover a commission alleged to have been earned by plaintiffs in procuring a purchaser for real property held for sale by defendants. Plaintiffs bad a Arerdict and defendants appealed from an order denying their motion for judgment or a new trial.

It appears without dispute that plaintiffs were authorized by defendants to procure a purchaser of the property under an agreement for compensation should they succeed. The evidence justified the jury in finding that subsequent to the agreement plaintiffs advertised the property for sale. The advertisement reached a prospective purchaser…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Steinbauer v. StoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  2. Robertson v. BurtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  3. American Engine Co. v. CrowleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  4. Bailey v. Grand Forks Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  5. Ellington v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1904

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Eichhorn v. LundinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  2. Linderoth v. KiefferSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  3. Herbst v. SuilmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  4. Knight Soda Fountain Co. v. DirnbergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  5. Daigle v. Twin City Ready Mix Concrete Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1964

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API