Colish v. Goldstein
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
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
- Hertzog v. HertzogSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Cameron, to Use v. EynonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Thomas v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Moore v. W. J. Gilmore Drug Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Levick B. & L. Assn. v. CollinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
3Cited by28 opinions
- Birchwood Lakes Community Ass'n v. ComisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Zvonik v. ZvonikSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Brenna v. Nationwide InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Linnet v. HitchcockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- DeGasperi v. VALICENTI Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.