Reichardt v. Hill
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Tennessee; Edward T. Sanford, Judge. Action by Arthur C. Reichardt against H. G. TIill and tbe H. G. Hill Grocery & Baking Company. There was a judgment for defendants and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
WARRINGTON, Circuit Judge.
In the amended form of the action below, Reichardt, plaintiff, sought to recover compensation for services alleged to have been, rendered by him in September, 1911, at the request of Hill and the Hill Grocery & Baking Company, defendants, in procuring a purchaser for their nine grocery stores situated in St. Louis. Plaintiff alleges that his compensation was to be given in the form of an electric coupé of the value of $3,500, and that pursuant to this contract he negotiated the sale of the stores to the Maurer-Remley Company at a price of more than $52,000.…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Harris v. RunnelsSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Miller v. AmmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Dunlop v. MercerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Pangborn v. WestlakeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- Anglo-American Land, Mortgage & Agency Co. v. LombardCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Cary v. Borden CompanySupreme Court of Colorado · 1963
- Thomas v. JarvisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1974
- Quick Shops of Mississippi, Inc. v. BruceMississippi Supreme Court · 1970
- R. E. Hughes v. Paul H. Chapman, Paul H. Chapman, Cross-Appellant v. R. E. Hughes, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Howell v. Connecticut Fire InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1923
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.