Legal Opinion
LaCourse v. Kiesel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided January 2, 1951No. Appeal, 232PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Ladner,
From the findings of the learned chancellor supported by adequate evidence and approved by the court en banc, we state the following facts: The defendants, Anna M. Kiesel, William Kiesel, Jr., and Ruth R. Kiesel, hereinafter referred to as individual defendants, being owners of premises 101 Montgomery Avenue, Bala Cynwyd, Pa., engaged Louis Traiman Auction Company of Pa., hereinafter referred to as Traiman Company, to act as their agent in advertising and selling their property at public auction. Traiman Company prepared a handbill advertising the property which…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Gianni v. Russell Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Henry v. EvesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Braunschweiger v. WaitsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Feuerstein v. New Century Realty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Lake v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Bortz v. NoonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Kronenberg v. KatzCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2004
- Germantown Manufacturing Co. v. RawlinsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Halpert v. RosenthalSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1970
- Betz Laboratories, Inc. v. HinesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.