Frederick A. Schmidt Co. v. Mall

OPINION

By HAMILTON, J.

It is to be noted that under its terms,the contract with the Schmidt Company, had expired on the 15th day of October, some 10 or 11 days before the contract of sale was entered into with Robertson, Jr. Thus we see that the claimed right on the part of the plaintiff to recover was based on the fact that an agent of the plaintiff company had something to do with Robertson, Jr., looking at the house during the life of the contract. It is not claimed that any terms were entered into or that Robertson, Jr., was disposed to enter into a contract through the plaintiff company…