Legal Opinion

Rutherford v. Berick

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 10, 1947No. Civ. 13403PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

The first amended complaint alleged two causes of action: first, the breach of an oral contract by which plaintiff was employed to find a purchaser ready, able and willing to purchase a business known as “Brothers Tavern,” and secondly, an alleged promise of both the seller and buyer defendants to pay plaintiff a broker’s commission. The court granted a nonsuit on the second cause of action, and a judgment in favor of plaintiff and against the seller, defendant Berick • (hereinafter referred to as defendant), for a commission on the sale of the tavern.

Two points are raised on this appeal: (1)…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Estate of RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. McCluskey v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Haigler v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Palmtag v. DanielsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Backman v. Guadalupe Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1926

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Rose v. HunterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. Meherin v. MeherinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  3. Reid v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Hodges v. PorikosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Fadel v. SlaymanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949

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