Legal Opinion

Thompson, Exrx. v. Barrow

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 8, 1922No. Appeal, 41PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Porter, J.,

The plaintiff’s decedent was a licensed real estate broker, as is also the defendant. This action is brought to recover one-half of the commissions received by the defendant upon the sale of a factory property in the City of Philadelphia. The plaintiff averred the right to recover one-half of said commissions, upon a contract alleged to have been entered into between the decedent and an agent employed in the office and acting on behalf of the defendant. The plaintiff recovered a verdict and judgment in the court below and the defendant appeals.

We have here but two…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Butler v. MaplesSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  2. Brooke v. New York, Lake Erie, & Western R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
  3. Beal & Simons v. Adams Express Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
  4. Nippenose Manufacturing Co. v. StadonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Miller v. Central Trust & Savings Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Bayne v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. Cardish v. TomazowskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  4. Young Co., Inc. v. HeinzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  5. Arrott Steam Power Mills Co. v. Philadelphia Wood Heel Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1944

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API