Legal Opinion

Lamb v. Condon

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 26, 1923No. Appeal, No. 113PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

T. M. Lamb, holding the license of a real estate broker, trading however as Lamb & Company, — a brother had been associated with him formerly, — entered into an agreement with the defendants to sell for them certain lands, and it was understood that compensation of $5,000 should be given, if his efforts were successful. A purchaser was secured and the property transferred, but the commissions remained unpaid, and, as a result, this suit was brought. An affidavit of defense was filed, averring that the sum agreed upon was not to be due until another lot owned by…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. National Fertilizer Co. v. Fall River Five Cents Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  2. Engle v. Capital Fire InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Walker v. MasonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  4. Mangan v. Schuylkill CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  5. Potter v. OsgoodSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Severance v. Knight-Counihan Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
  2. F. F. Bollinger Co. v. Widmann Brewing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Ross v. McMillanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  4. Icebox-Scoops, Inc. v. Finanz St. Honoré, B.V.District Court, E.D. New York · 2009
  5. Stoner v. HigginsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

36 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