Thomas v. Barnes
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
TWO ACTIONS OF CONTRACT. In the first action, the plaintiff, Thomás, sought to recover an alleged balance on an account annexed, the first item of which was as follows: “ To amount due for repairing and fitting up store, 194 Lincoln Street and 47 Utica Street, and building refrigerator, as per contract, $900.00.” In the second action, the plaintiffs, Barnes et al., sought to recover of Thomas damages for breach of contract to build the refrigerator, and upon an alleged…
Read the full summary
TWO ACTIONS OF CONTRACT. In the first action, the plaintiff, Thomás, sought to recover an alleged balance on an account annexed, the first item of which was as follows: “ To amount due for repairing and fitting up store, 194 Lincoln Street and 47 Utica Street, and building refrigerator, as per contract, $900.00.” In the second action, the plaintiffs, Barnes et al., sought to recover of Thomas damages for breach of contract to build the refrigerator, and upon an alleged warranty of the same, and they set up the same breaches of contract, with claims for recoupment, in defence to the first…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
A paper writing signed by the parties, and purporting to set forth their whole contract, cannot be contradicted, altered, enlarged, or diminished by proof of previous or contemporaneous conversations between the parties. Goodrich v. Longley, 4 Gray, 379. Clark v. Houghton, 12 Gray, 38. Perry v. Bigelow, 128 Mass. 129. Frost v. Brigham, 139 Mass. 43. Me Guinness v. Shannon, 154 Mass. 86. To add to it or ■ take from it by such conversations would be to contradict or alter it. In the present case it appears that the contract relied on was a bilateral executory one. Duplicate papers were…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wilson v. PowersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Bartlett v. StanchfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Lattimore v. HarsenNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Bishop v. BusseIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- Perry v. BigelowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Bates v. SouthgateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Hill v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Taylor v. FinniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Rowe v. Inhabitants of PeabodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Narragansett Amusement Co. v. Riverside Park Amusement Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.