Legal Opinion

Miller v. Wick Building Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 5, 1950No. 32016PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaut, J.

It is the contention of Miller that there is substantial evidence in the record tending to prove that Paul Wick, assuming to act on behalf of the build ing company, entered into an oral agreement with Miller and Rand; that, under such agreement, the building company was to pay Miller and Rand a commission for securing a buyer, ready, willing and able to purchase the Wick building at a price of $800,000 net cash to the building company, and such commission was to be whatever amount such buyer agreed to pay in addition to such price; and that Miller and Rand did secure such a buyer who agreed…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  2. Chestnut Street Trust & Saving Fund Co. v. Record Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  3. Lois Grunow Memorial Clinic v. DavisArizona Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Navco Hardwood Co. v. BassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  5. Bradford Belting Co. v. GibsonOhio Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Albain v. Flower HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Master Consolidated Corp. v. BancOhio National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Richard Olsen v. Gerald T. McFaul SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
  4. Niemi v. NHK Spring Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
  5. Bernard J. Lee, Platiff-Appellant v. Jenkins Brothers, Bernard J. Lee v. Farnham YardleyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959

37 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