Merkeley

Merkeley v. Fisk

Good Law
179 Cal. 748·1919 Cal. LEXIS 600·178 P. 945
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 17, 1919Sac. No. 2724.California1,886 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lennon, J.

In this action to recover a commission of $3,227.55 for the alleged sale of real estate the plaintiffs’ cause of action arises out of the execution by and between the plaintiffs and defendants of two written agreements. The first one executed and dated November 19, 1913, is as follows:

The second memorandum of agreement, dated and executed December 12, 1913, is as follows:

In addition to setting forth the foregoing agreements in haec verba the plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that the second memorandum was by the defendants executed and delivered to the plaintiffs as “a modification and addition to said agreement entered into November 19, 1913.” Further, in support of the cause of action relied upon the plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that on or about the twelfth day of December, 1913, “the plaintiffs found and procured a purchaser for the land described in said ‘Exhibit A’ (the first memorandum) described as follows:

The defendants demurred to the second amended complaint, generally, upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and specifically, that several causes of action were improperly joined and that the complaint was uncertain 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.