Legal Opinion
Pentino v. Gallo
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 27, 1928PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.
The complaint contains two counts based upon the same transaction, the first for an agreed commission of five per cent upon the value of the defendants’ farm, amounting to $1,750, and the second for the reasonable value of the plaintiff’s services, also placed at $1,750.
Upon the conclusion of the .evidence, the plaintiff prepared five interrogatories and requested that they be submitted to the jury, but the court did not do so. These and the action of the court thereon are made a part of the finding by request of the plaintiff. Interrogatories may be resorted to, to protect the party making…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Rice v. WoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Aaronson v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Quinn v. BurtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Ford v. H. W. Dubiskie & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Carman v. . BeachNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hammer v. Mount Sinai HospitalConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Sheeler v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- City of Hartford v. Anderson Fairoaks, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1986
- Myer v. Preferred Credit, Inc.Harrison County Court of Common Pleas · 2001
- Seigel v. Cambridge-Wendell Realty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.