Legal Opinion

Martin v. Little, Brown and Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 4, 1981No. 349PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

This appeal was taken from an order sustaining preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer to appellant’s pro se complaint in assumpsit. The trial court held that a contract had not been made and that there could be no recovery on quantum meruit where appellant had volunteered information which enabled appellee, a publisher of books, to effect a recovery against a third person for copyright infringement. We agree and, accordingly, affirm.

The averments of the complaint 1 disclose that on September 28, 1976, the appellant, James L. Martin, directed a letter to Bantam Books,…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. PAPIEVES Et Ux. v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. Schott v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  3. Buchanan v. Brentwood Federal Savings & Loan Assoc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Gekas v. ShappSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Clevenstein v. RizzutoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. County Commissioners v. J. Roland Dashiell & Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  2. Braun v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. Stephan v. Waldron Electric Heating & Cooling LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Cisco v. United Parcel Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Jordan v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999

48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API