Legal Opinion

Bacon v. George

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 26, 1914PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C. J.

This case was before us in 206 Mass. 566. It there was decided that although technically the plaintiff as trustee in bankruptcy could not recover as the nominal party plaintiff, yet an opportunity ought to be given him to apply for an amendment, to enable him to prosecute the action as the only party beneficially interested and in the name of the original plaintiff. It further was said that if such an “amendment be allowed, then such proceedings thereafter shall be had either by way of a judgment upon the verdict, or of a new trial, or otherwise, as to that [the Superior] Court shall seem…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bacon v. GeorgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  2. Boyd v. TaylorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  3. Attorney General v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
  4. Stores v. WhiteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
  5. Warner v. CollinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Samuel v. Page-Storms Drop Forge Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  2. Blankenburg v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  3. Sevigny's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
  4. Guerin v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
  5. Roblin Hope Industries, Inc. v. J. A. Sullivan Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1980

1 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