Hambleton v. Hartman Et Ux.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hirt, J.,
Plaintiffs were duly licensed real estate brokers. Defendants, owners of real estate in Delaware County, entered into a written agency agreement with plaintiffs on March 31,1945, as follows: “The undersigned hereby employs Hambleton and Ezekiel as the sole and exclusive agent for the sale of the property described on the reverse hereof for a term of 2 months, and agrees to pay to the said agent a commission of (5%) on the gross consideration upon its sale or exchange, by whomsoever the same may be made or effected.” The real estate described in the agreement was the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Gianni v. Russell Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Speier v. MichelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Martin & Monroe v. BerensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- Irvin v. Irvin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Clearfield County1891
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- O'Brien v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Walker v. SaricksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Shinn v. StemlerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Black Et Ux. v. Cinquegrani Ex Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Smith v. MarcusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.