Legal Opinion

Coens v. Marousis

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1923No. Appeal, No. 188PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the value of his services as manager of a shoeshine parlor. Defendant, having secured rooms in New Castle, Pa., equipped them with furniture and a stock of goods suitable for conducting such business. He then solicited Coens, the plaintiff, to manage it under an agreement that, after the receipts from the business should repay the cost of the original investment, maintenance, and the board and room of plaintiff and defendant, plaintiff, who was to receive no compensation for his services meanwhile other than board and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Beaver v. SlaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Gibbs's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  3. Martin v. BairdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  4. Crow v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
  5. Irwin v. BidwellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Osterling v. FrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  2. Comstock v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Coon v. SchoenemanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1972
  4. Schuster v. LargmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Kirshon, Et Ux. v. FriedmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

11 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