Legal Opinion

Lucas v. Bode and Heinz

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 1928No. Appeal 11PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The defendants are real estate brokers and had in their hands as agents for one Compolo a property, in the City of Pittsburgh. They had caused the attention of the plaintiff to be directed to the property, had shown it to her and her son and she had orally agreed to pay for the property which she had thus examined the price named by the defendants. The defendants, shortly afterwards, prepared a written agreement for the sale of the property by Compolo to the plaintiff, which agreement described the property in detail and provided for the payment of the purchase money of “ten…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Henry v. BlackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  2. Kurzawski v. SchneiderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  3. Fishman v. BergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Yentis v. MillsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  2. Pennsylvania Co. for Insurances on Lives v. WallaceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. Bode Heinz v. CampoloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API