Legal Opinion

Beebe v. Kistler

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 4, 1921No. Civ. No. 3373PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

This is an action to recover a broker’s commission for a ■ sale of real property. Judgment went for plaintiff and the defendant appeals.

An act of the legislature passed in 1919 (Stats. 1919, p. 1252) created a state real estate department and provides for the issuance thereby of licenses to real estate brokers and real estate salesmen. Section 20 of the enactment denies to any broker or salesman the right to bring or maintain any action for the collection of commissions for sales of real property without alleging that he was duly licensed under the law at the time his cause of action arose.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Riley v. ChambersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Van Wyke v. BurrowsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  2. Whiddett v. MackNevada Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Fellom v. AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  4. Christman v. Guaranty Mortgage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Gittelson v. GandolfoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API