Willock v. Hamilton
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 116, April T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1912, No. 191, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Harry H. Willock v. C. C. Hamilton. Assumpsit for money had and received. Before Evans,. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $605. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were various instructions and rulings on evidence.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The defendant, a real estate broker, had acted as agent for the plaintiff in an attempt to exchange a lot owned by the latter for a property owned by Morris Kaufmann, and the proposed sale of the Kaufmann property when acquired by plaintiff to C. L. Young, the latter transaction being made by the terms of the agreement, dependent upon the success of the former. Young paid to the defendant, as agent of the plaintiff, the sum of $500. Plaintiff was unable to obtain title to the Kaufmann property; the proposed sale to Young could not be consummated; Young demanded the hand…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wilkinson Manufacturing Co. v. WeldeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Higgins Carpet Co. v. LatimerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- American Structural Steel Co. v. Annex Hotel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Stewart v. DeNoonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Carl Barckhoff Church Organ Co. v. EckerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898