Home/D.C. Circuit/Samuel Blanken & Co., Inc. v. Shannon & Luchs Company

Samuel Blanken & Co., Inc. v. Shannon & Luchs Company

371 F.2d 950, 125 U.S. App. D.C. 297
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedDecember 1, 1966
Docket20060
StatusPublished
Cited by46 cases

This text of 371 F.2d 950 (Samuel Blanken & Co., Inc. v. Shannon & Luchs Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Samuel Blanken & Co., Inc. v. Shannon & Luchs Company, 371 F.2d 950, 125 U.S. App. D.C. 297 (D.C. Cir. 1966).

Opinion

TAMM, Circuit Judge:

This appeal involves the same subject matter as Samuel Blanken & Co. v. Sigmund Goldblatt et al. (No. 20,014, Dec. 1, 1966), 371 F.2d 949, decided this day adversely to appellant. No attempt will be made here to discuss the facts delineated therein, except to state that appellee here is the agent of the lessor and that appellant, having failed to recover against appellee in a prior contract action, Blanken v. Goldblatt, et al., No. 19,536 (Nov. 23, 1965), is here seeking recovery of the reasonable value of his services by way of quantum meruit.

The District Court granted appellee’s motion to dismiss. We believe that appellant’s claims here are governed by the principles announced in today’s Gold-blatt decision. Moreover, it conclusively appears from the record in the two cases that appellant was definitely on notice that he could not look to the appellee for his commission, but rather must look to the lessees.

The decision of the District Court being clearly correct, it is therefore affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

HOUSER v. FELDMAN
E.D. Pennsylvania, 2021
Heraeus Medical GMBH v. Esschem Inc
927 F.3d 727 (Third Circuit, 2019)
Scr-Tech LLC v. Evonik Energy Servs. LLC
2011 NCBC 26 (North Carolina Business Court, 2011)
Grow Company, Inc. v. Chokshi
959 A.2d 252 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2008)
Bondpro Corporation v. Siemens Power Genera
Seventh Circuit, 2006
DVD Copy Control Ass'n Inc. v. Bunner
10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 185 (California Court of Appeal, 2004)
Cadence Design Systems v. Avant! Corporation
57 P.3d 647 (California Supreme Court, 2002)
Glue-Fold, Inc. v. Slautterback Corp.
98 Cal. Rptr. 2d 661 (California Court of Appeal, 2000)
Darrell R. Page v. United States
729 F.2d 818 (D.C. Circuit, 1984)
Anaconda Co. v. Metric Tool & Die Co.
485 F. Supp. 410 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1980)
Exxon Corporation v. Federal Trade Commission Kerr-Mcgee Corporation v. Federal Trade Commission Union Carbide Corporation v. Federal Trade Commission
589 F.2d 582 (D.C. Circuit, 1978)
Eckert v. Skagit Corp.
583 P.2d 1239 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1978)
Zotos International, Inc. v. Kennedy
460 F. Supp. 268 (District of Columbia, 1978)
Edward A. Winter v. Local Union No. 639, Affiliated With the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Maloney Concrete Company (Two Cases)
569 F.2d 146 (D.C. Circuit, 1978)
A. Ernest Fitzgerald v. Robert C. Seamans, Jr.
553 F.2d 220 (D.C. Circuit, 1977)
Edouard Legille v. C. Marshall Dann, Commissioner of Patents
544 F.2d 1 (D.C. Circuit, 1976)
Lantz v. Wedbush, Noble, Cooke, Inc.
418 F. Supp. 653 (D. Alaska, 1976)
L'Enfant Plaza East, Inc. v. John McShain, Inc.
359 A.2d 5 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1976)
Johnson v. United States
527 F.2d 1209 (Court of Claims, 1975)
M & T Chemicals, Inc. v. International Business MacHines Corp.
403 F. Supp. 1145 (S.D. New York, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
371 F.2d 950, 125 U.S. App. D.C. 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-blanken-co-inc-v-shannon-luchs-company-cadc-1966.