Hill v. Smith
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 124, Oct. T., 1920, by defendant, from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Sept. T., 1919, No. 386, for plaintiff in case tried by the court without a jury in suit of Nelson P. W. Hill v. Gilbert D. Smith. Assumpsit for commissions earned in the sale of real estate. Before Cassidy, J., without a jury. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court rendered judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $205.39. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 124, Oct. T., 1920, by defendant, from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Sept. T., 1919, No. 386, for plaintiff in case tried by the court without a jury in suit of Nelson P. W. Hill v. Gilbert D. Smith. Assumpsit for commissions earned in the sale of real estate. Before Cassidy, J., without a jury. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court rendered judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $205.39. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was the judgment of the court. cited: Campbell v. McClenaban, 6 S. & B. 171; Shugart v. Moore, 78 Pa. 469; Oliver to…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
Suit was brought by the plaintiff to recover commissions as a real estate broker. He entered into an agreement with the defendant to sell for him certain real estate owned by the defendant and his wife as tenants by entireties. The defendant alone signed the contract as “owner.” The agent procured a purchaser for the property at the price named in the written agreement. Defendant refused to conclude the transaction alleging that his wife declined to join in the sale. He claims that at the time the agreement of agency was executed there was a contemporaneous understanding…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thompson v. SchochSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916