Sprague v. Reilly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 97, April T., 1907, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., May T., 1899, No. 485, on verdict for plaintiff in case of T. A. Sprague now to use of C. Y. Morozwicz v. P. J. Reilly. Assumpsit to recover commissions on sale or exchange of real estate.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 97, April T., 1907, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., May T., 1899, No. 485, on verdict for plaintiff in case of T. A. Sprague now to use of C. Y. Morozwicz v. P. J. Reilly. Assumpsit to recover commissions on sale or exchange of real estate. Before Evans, J. / , At the trial defendant made the following offer: Defendant offers in evidence the “ Statement of Claim ” of the plaintiff in this case, for the purpose of showing that in the year 1898, said plaintiff was a real estate broker, by using in his statement the following words, to wit: “ The plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The plaintiff brought this action to recover the sum of 1338.65, being “a commission of five per cent” on the value of certain real estate which it is alleged the defendant exchanged through the efforts of the plaintiff. Against this claim the defendant sought to interpose the defense that the plaintiff, at the time, was a real estate dealer or broker, and, having neglected to take out the license required by law, could not recover. That such defense, if made out, would have precluded any recovery cannot be gainsaid: Johnson v. Hulings, 103 Pa. 498. The burden of proof was,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Johnson v. HulingsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
3Cited by2 opinions
- Scott Et Ux. v. LindgrenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Wills & Co. v. Lefevre, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1925