Woods v. Heron
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 41, Oct. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Allegheny Co., Third T., 1907, No. 133, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William L. Woods v. John B. Heron, Jr. Assumpsit to recover commissions for sale of real estate. Before Carnahan, J. The facts appear in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Errors assigned were various rulings and instructions of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The subject of the controversy at the trial was the plaintiff’s right to commissions for the sale of real estate. The grounds of defense to the action were that the plaintiff was a real estate broker and had not obtained a license, that he was not employed to make the sale, but was acting for a trust company in whose real estate department he was employed and that tjie sale was not effected through his agency or that of the company. The first ground of defense was eliminated by the court’s instruction to the jury that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain a finding that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Chadwick v. CollinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1856
- Black v. SnookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
3Cited by3 opinions
- Downing v. MarksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Noll v. MastrupSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943
- Springsteen v. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1919