Junk v. Golden Ranch Sugar & Cattle Co.
Citations
- 122 La. 794
- 48 So. 267
- 1909 La. LEXIS 611
Syllabus
<p>Beokeks (§ 86*) — Action fob Commissions— Evidence.</p> <p>Plaintiffs sue the defendant for commissions alleged to be due to them under a brokerage contract for a sale of part of its property. The case was tried by a jury, which returned a verdict for plaintiffs as prayed for, and judgment was rendered in conformity thereto. Defendant appealed.</p> <p>Held, under the facts of the case, the verdict of the jury and the judgment rendered therein are erroneous, and the same are set aside, annulled, and reversed.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Brokers, Cent. Dig. §§ 116-120; Dec. Dig. § 86.*]</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[T]he Supreme Court’s merits analysis of the Proclamation under rational basis review was based on a preliminary record representing a snapshot in time and does not necessarily preclude a different determination at a later stage of the case on a more fulsome record.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Land, Nicholls
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.