Pinney

Pinney v. Wilson

Good Law
1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 344·7 Cal. Unrep. 309·87 P. 1111
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 1906California325 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Buckles, J.

This was an action to recover the sum of $40,000 as a reasonable compensation for plaintiff’s services rendered in procuring a purchaser for t'he defendant’s mining claims, situated in Trinity County, known as the ChlorideBaily, Jenny Lind, and Maple group of mines. The action is based on a written promise, contained in a letter written by defendant to plaintiff, “to pay you a reasonable compensation for such service.” In another part of the letter he says: “To pay you such compensation as in equity and good conscience you are entitled and the margin of profit therein will permit.” The case was tried with a jury, which returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $7,500, and judgment was given for that amount. Plaintiff moved for a new trial, which was granted, and defendants appeal from the order granting a new trial.

At the trial it was shown that plaintiff introduced to Wilson (defendant and appellant) one Charles Sweeny, who purchased of Wilson the said mines for $235,000. Every witness produced for the plaintiff testified that ten per cent on the amount for which mining property should sell was a reasonable compensation for the services in finding a purchaser.…

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.