Legal Opinion

Brandenburg v. Brooke

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 3, 1911No. Appeal, No. 248Published

Appeal, No. 248, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Berks Co., Equity Docket, 1907, No. .946, sustaining exceptions to auditor’s report in case of C. G. Brandenburg et al., trading as Brandenburg & Company, v. George Brooke, Jr., Trustee. Exceptions to report of D. N. Schaeffer, Esq., auditor. Errors assigned were in sustaining exceptions to auditor’s report.

1Opinion of the Court

Endlich, P. J.,

filed the following opinion:

Brandenburg & Company had a contract with the Keystone Wagon Works, running from February 1, 1907, to July 1, 1910, constituting the former sole agents for the latter for the sale of automobile bodies, etc., at a commission to be figured at ten per cent upon the aggregate net price of all automobile bodies, etc., sold, manufactured and shipped by the company during the continuance of the contract. The company was to furnish to the agents monthly, between the fifth and fifteenth, a statement of the bodies, etc., shipped during the preceding month, and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mayer v. WalterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
  2. Stradley v. Bath Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  3. Schwan v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  4. Buck v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
  5. Phœnix Silk Manufacturing Co. v. ReillySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898

6 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