Legal Opinion

Blau v. Richman

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

Decided September 27, 1938No. 5761Published

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, P. J.,

— This matter comes before us on preliminary objections to a bill of complaint. The bill of complaint asks that a sale in bulk made by defendant Harry Feinstein to defendant Morris Rich-man be set aside because plaintiff, a business broker, who alleges he brought the parties together, had not as a creditor for commissions due him by Feinstein received notice *482of the sale in accordance with the terms of the Bulk Sales Act of May 23,1919, P. L. 262.

The sole question is whether plaintiff, as a broker claiming commissions from the vendor at the rate of 10 percent of the gross sale…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Burnett v. TrimmellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1918
  2. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1918
  3. George H. West Shoe Co. v. LemishSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Interstate Shirt & Collar Co. v. WindhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Touris v. KarantzalisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915

3 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