Legal Opinion

Fort Payne Rolling Mill v. Hill

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 7, 1899PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Contract, for money had and received. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Fessenden, J., the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, C. J.

This is an action to recover a sum received or retained by the defendant by way of discount upon debts of the plaintiff company which the defendant settled. This discount was or might have been found to have been received by the defendant in pursuance of votes of the directors by which he was employed to settle claims against the plaintiff company, and was to be allowed five per cent of the face value of bonds used in payment and whatever discount he could get from the claims. He was a director, but took no part in the votes. The main *225question is whether after the services have been rendered…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Nye v. StorerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Globe Woolen Co. v. Utica Gas & Electric Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  2. Fillebrown v. HaywardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
  3. Winchell v. Plywood Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
  4. Barnes v. Spencer & Barnes Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Gall v. CowellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API