Legal Opinion
Gabriel v. Glickman
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided January 28, 1947PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Bbown, S. C. 0.
The plaintiff moves to strike the defendants’ answer on the ground that it is sham and frivolous and the separate defenses therein on the ground that they are sham and frivolous and in law do not constitute a sufficient answer. The suit is brought to recover a broker’s commission alleged to be due under a contract made between the defendants and the buyer, Dieran Goulian. The contract was in printed form with spaces which were filled by typewriting. Newton G. Gabriel was the broker who brought about the sale and thereafter assigned his claim to the plaintiff. The suit is based…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Kimmell v. SkellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Peoples' Bank v. MorgolofskiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
- Holt v. United Security Life Insurance & Trust Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1909
- Dunston Lithograph Co. v. BorgoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- Schwarz Bros. v. Evening News Publishing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Terrance J. Velten v. Regis B. Lippert, Intercat, Inc., Intercat Pacific, Inc., Formerly Intercat, U.S.A.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Shulton, Inc. v. RubinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Cohen v. ScolaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
- Baucom v. FriendDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947