Legal Opinion
Herley, Inc. v. Harsch
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided June 20, 1938PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
This cause is in this court on appeal on questions of law and fact. It is á suit to compel the defendant, Leila Close Harsch, the owner of a certain downtown Toledo business property, to specifically perform a contract to make a lease of that property to the plaintiff.
The material parts of the contract in question are as follows:
“Toledo, Ohio, February 14, 1938.
“Received of Herley, Inc., a deposit of $300 to be applied on account to lease premises [description] for for a period of three years on a rental basis of $300 a month. It is understood that a regular and customary form of lease shall…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Halsell v. RenfrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Davis v. WinterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1935
- Davenport v. LatimerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
- Morris v. CurtinIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
- Coleman v. DuntonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1904
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Molokai Ranch, Ltd. v. MorrisHawaii Supreme Court · 1942
- Normandin v. Eastland Partners, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Reck v. DaleyOhio Court of Appeals · 1943
- Video Towne, Inc. v. RB-3 AssociatesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988