Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0202-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 152
    L. B. CLARK v. S. S. SALBERG
    Ohio Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County
    No. 4114,
    Jan. 15, 1923
    This Opinion Has Been Published in The Abstract Only
    CONFIDENTIAL RELATION
    Error from Cleveland Municpal Court
    Attorneys — D. M. Balder, for Clark; F. C. Printy, for Salberg.
   EPITOMIZED OPINION

PER CURIAM:

This case inyolves the right of the plaintff to recover compensation for negotiating a lease between the lessor and lessee. On the trial testimony developed the fact that the plaintiff was acting as the agent of both the lessor and lessee, the fact that he was acting as agent for the lessee not having been disclosed to the lessor.

Held:

He could not recover, if he were acting for both parties without making full disclosure of the same.