Legal Opinion

Matolicz v. Hess

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 18, 1925No. Appeal 259PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

This judgment, entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, cannot be sustained. A real estate broker sued for commissions alleged to have been earned pursuant to a contract to obtain a purchaser ready and willing to purchase real estate of defendant. The affidavit of defense avers that the commission was to be payable only “if a sale was effected” “upon terms satisfactory to” defendant. He admits an averment in the statement to the effect that he executed an agreement of sale to a proposed vendee (procured by plaintiff) for $14,000, of which $2500 was to be paid…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Simon v. MyersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  2. Keel v. SchadewaldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Matuszewski v. GrisiusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  2. Amorosa v. OvelmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API