Dolan

Dolan v. O'Toole

Bad Law
129 Cal. 488·1900 Cal. LEXIS 1011·62 P. 92
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 10, 1900S.F. No. 2124.California445 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

Defendant was the owner of a certain mine, and had contracted with a third party for the sale of it upon certain terms—in substance, that the purchaser should be put in possession for a specified time for the purpose of examination and development, and, if found satisfactory, to pay therefor a specified price. Plaintiff was an experienced miner and expert, and was well acquainted with the location of the mine and the work done in it, and while the conditional purchasers were in possession under their contract and prospecting for ore, defendant made a contract with the plaintiff for his services “to be" rendered in aiding him' [defendant] to consummate the sale under the contract,” and for which, if the sale was made, he was to receive ten per cent of the purchase price. It appearing that the said contract for plaintiff’s services was oral, objection was made and sustained to the evidence. It was then offered by the plaintiff to be shown that at the request of the purchasers plaintiff gave them directions where to work to develop ore, that his directions were followed successfully and resulted in such development of ore as induced the purchase under said contract. The court…

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.