Legal Opinion

Hannan Real Estate Exchange v. Davis

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1927No. Docket No. 172PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

This is an action to recover compensation for procuring a purchaser of real estate. At the conclusion of proof both parties requested directed verdict. Verdict was directed for plaintiff and judgment entered thereon. Defendant brings error.

If the court’s decision, both parties having requested directed verdict, is right in law and supported by substantial evidence, the judgment must be affirmed.. Funk v. Guaranty Co., 224 Mich. 95; Simpson v. Murphy, 229 Mich. 449; E. Clemens Horst Co. v. Dunn, 229 Mich. 56.

The writing evidencing the engagement is:

“Hannan Real Estate Exchange:
“In the event…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Simpson v. MurphyMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Funk v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1923
  3. E. Clemens Horst Co. v. DunnMichigan Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stratford Arms Hotel Co. v. General Casualty & Surety Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
  2. McGuire v. SinnettOregon Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Advance Realty Co. v. SpanosMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Filler v. Gilmartin's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API