Legal Opinion

Colish v. Goldstein

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 12, 1961No. Appeal, 144PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Woodside, J.,

This is an appeal by the defendant in an assumpsit action from a judgment for |1500 entered against him in favor of an architect after a trial before a judge without a jury. The appellant asks for judgment n.o.v., or in lieu thereof, a new trial.

The evidence establishes that Morris Goldstein, the defendant, purchased a tract of land along City Line Avenue, Philadelphia, for the purpose of erecting an office building thereon. He was told that Aaron Colish, an architect, “might do [him] some good.”

Thereupon, he telephoned Colish, who took him to lunch and discussed with…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hertzog v. HertzogSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
  2. Cameron, to Use v. EynonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  3. Thomas v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Moore v. W. J. Gilmore Drug Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Levick B. & L. Assn. v. CollinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Birchwood Lakes Community Ass'n v. ComisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Zvonik v. ZvonikSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Brenna v. Nationwide InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Linnet v. HitchcockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. DeGasperi v. VALICENTI Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962

23 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