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

  1. Halsell v. RenfrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  2. Davis v. WinterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1935
  3. Davenport v. LatimerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
  4. Morris v. CurtinIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Coleman v. DuntonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1904

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Molokai Ranch, Ltd. v. MorrisHawaii Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Normandin v. Eastland Partners, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
  3. Reck v. DaleyOhio Court of Appeals · 1943
  4. Video Towne, Inc. v. RB-3 AssociatesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API