Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JOHN G. BICKELL v. HAROLD STEIN (09/25/81)

filed: September 25, 1981.

JOHN G. BICKELL, APPELLANT,
v.
HAROLD STEIN, FRANK CICCARONE, INDV. AND T/A TOWN AND COUNTRY REALTORS, ELMER RESNICK, AND WOODBINE PARK APARTMENTS, INC.



No. 1997 Philadelphia, 1980, Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, Civil Action No. 79-22188.

COUNSEL

Robert M. Reibstein, Narberth, for appellant.

Barry M. Miller, Norristown, for Stein, appellee.

Douglas Breidenbach, Norristown, for Ciccarone, appellee.

Howard B. Zavodnick, Philadelphia, for Resnick, etc., appellees.

Price, Montemuro and Van der Voort, JJ. Price, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Author: Montemuro

[ 291 Pa. Super. Page 147]

This is an appeal from an Order sustaining appellee, Frank Ciccarone's preliminary objections and demurrer to the second amended complaint of appellant, John Bickell. The court below dismissed the complaint because the statutory

[ 291 Pa. Super. Page 148]

    limitation had run as to both causes of action against him. We affirm the Order for the reasons stated below.

On June 21, 1974, appellant bought an apartment building from Woodbine Park Apartments, Inc. (hereinafter, "Seller"). Negotiations leading to the agreement of sale were handled through the agency of appellee, who acted as Seller's real estate broker, and Harold Stein, whom appellant had retained under an exclusive agency contract to find properties for investment. Stein was entitled under his contract to a finder's fee of 6%. However, he was not a licensed broker and therefore not legally qualified to share in a regular real estate commission.

On November 19, 1979, appellant commenced the present action against appellee, Stein, Seller, and Seller's president and majority shareholder, Elmer Resnick. The first cause of action alleges that appellee and Seller caused Stein to make fraudulent representations to appellant about the property's structural soundness and profitability, in return for a share of the commission appellee would receive from Seller if appellant purchased the property. The second cause of action alleges that appellee and Seller intentionally interfered with the contractual relations of exclusive agency between Stein and appellant.*fn1 Finally, the complaint alleges that appellant did not discover the fee-splitting agreement between appellee and Stein until April 15, 1978.

Appellee raised the statute of limitations as a preliminary objection in the nature of a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.