Legal Opinion

Goldman v. Eisenberg

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 30, 1926PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWait, J.

This is an action at law. The plaintiffs are bound by their agreement to accept the terms of the written and sealed contract of purchase and sale executed by their principals and the purchasers found by the plaintiffs. That agreement provides that the plaintiffs’ commission of $1,000 should be paid “if and when papers are passed.”

The evidence established that, when suit was brought, papers had not been passed. The plaintiffs contend that, notwithstanding this fact, they can maintain their action. The trial judge and the Appellate Division of the Municipal Court of the City of Boston have…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rosenthal v. SchwartzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  2. Clark v. HoveyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. John T. Burns & Sons Inc. v. HandsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  2. Spritz v. Brockton Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  3. Creed v. ApogMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1978
  4. Lord v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  5. Keerd v. UsenMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1982

3 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