Murphy v. Helmrich
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.
This was an action to recover, the difference between the contract and market price of one hundred shares of San Francisco gas stock, which the plaintiff claims to have sold to the defendants on the 15th of October, 1878.
It is contended that the defendants are not liable, because there was no note or memorandum of the sale in writing, or subscribed by them, and therefore the sale was void; and because in the transaction they acted in the capacity of brokers for another person for whom they purchased, and not for themselves.
The promise by the defendants on the 15th of October, to take the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Sunset-Sternau Food Co. v. BonziCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Coover v. CoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Farr v. SteinMontana Supreme Court · 1918
- Whitney v. WoodmanseeIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Clark v. BaenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.