Legal Opinion

Kloke v. Pongratz

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 11, 1940No. Civ. 12326PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

This action was brought to recover moneys for services rendered in assisting to procure a lease. It resulted in a judgment by the court in the sum of $13,477.26 against defendant Pongratz who alone prosecutes this appeal.

The grounds of appeal are: (1) The insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings; (2) the limitation upon plaintiff’s right of recovery in that any judgment obtained by him would essentially be collectible only out of partnership assets inasmuch as defendant entered into the transaction more than six weeks after plaintiff’s employment (Civ. Code, sec. 2411); and (3)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Swanson v. SiemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  2. Associated Piping & Engineering Co. v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Blinn v. RitchieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Persson v. Smart Inventions, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  2. Raphael v. RaphaelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  3. Constans v. RossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Smalley v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  5. Harden v. Skinner & HammondCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

4 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