Troendle

Troendle v. Clinch

Good Law
125 Cal. App. 147·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 547·13 P.2d 852
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 29, 1932Docket No. 7388.California1,990 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tappaan, J.

Plaintiff and respondent here recovered a judgment as against defendants and appellants, Clinch and Thurtle, real estate brokers and copartners, and one Donnell, the mother-in-law of defendant Clinch. No judgment was had as against defendant Weadon.

The evidence as presented upon this appeal discloses the following facts. Plaintiff for some years prior to the transactions here involved was the owner of a certain house and lot in the city of Los Angeles and had attempted to sell or trade the same. She had at different times listed this property with various real estate agents for sale. Plaintiff was directed to defendants Clinch and Thurtle by a real estate firm with whom she had had some business transaction, some time between the 1st and 10th of April, 1927. On April 12, 1927, defendant Clinch first learned that a fifty-year lease of certain property situated upon Western Avenue in the city of Los Angeles could be secured for the sum of $6,500, though Clinch did not succeed in contacting the owner of this lease until April 19, 1927. On April 12, 1927, the day he first learned that the Western Avenue lease could be purchased, defendant Clinch called plaintiff to his office and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.