Gorham

Gorham v. Heiman

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 938·90 Cal. 346·27 P. 289
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 24, 1891Nos. 12958, 13333California3,764 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beatty, J.

J.— This is a suit in equity arising out of a controversy between several opposing claimants to a sum of money in the hands of the London and San Francisco Bank. There are two appeals in the case, the first, No. 12958, being an appeal by plaintiffs from a part of the judgment in favor of the interveners, and the second, No. 13333, being an appeal by the defendants Heiman and Hamilton from the whole judgment, which was in favor of the plaintiffs and the interveners. The two appeals have been argued and submitted, and may be conveniently considered together.

The controversy arose upon the following state of facts: In January, 1886, and prior thereto, John Bathgeb and brother were owners of a valuable mine in Calaveras County, known as the Cordova mine, which they were willing to sell for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, less ten per cent commission to any broker who might effect a sale for them at that figure. The plaintiffs Gorham and Bank, were partners in the business of selling mines and other real estate on commission, and had been in communication with the Bathgebs, endeavoring to secure written authority to make sale of their mine. The interveners, Snell and others,…

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.