Legal Opinion

Nickerson v. Spindell

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 19, 1895PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.

There was evidence to show that the plaintiff performed the services and incurred the expenses set out in his declaration, in superintending the building of a steamer for the defendants and others who were the owners of her, and that he did this at the request of the defendant Spindell, who was the managing agent of the owners.

It is contended that there can be no recovery, inasmuch as the plaintiff was one of the signers of the agreement under which the steamer was built. But this was merely an agreement on the part of each of the subscribers to it to take a share in the enterprise, and to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Saveland v. GreenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. ShotterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
  3. Smith v. EastonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1880
  4. Durkee v. Vermont Central RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
  5. State v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1877

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Butler v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  2. Copithorne v. HardyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
  3. Dillon v. BarnardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
  4. Scott v. Kona Development Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Bokelmann v. BokelmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930

4 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