Tozier v. Crafts
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for goods sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general -denial; 2. That the goods were sold to Howard Crafts and Judson < Crafts, doing business under the firm name of Crafts Brothers; and that they paid for the same by their notes.
Read the full summary
Contract for goods sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general -denial; 2. That the goods were sold to Howard Crafts and Judson < Crafts, doing business under the firm name of Crafts Brothers; and that they paid for the same by their notes. Triahin the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., who allowed a bill -of-exceptions in substance as follows : W. D. Vietts testified, for the plaintiffs, that he was their agent in selling liquors; that a few days before October 10, 1873, he saw the defendant at Holyoke, and the defendant told him that he had bought out a billiard-room, and was going to put…
1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.
The objections taken by the defendant to the admission of the letter to the plaintiffs from their agent, Vietts, do not appear to us to be well founded. The letter was not used as a substitute for an original order, or as a copy of an original entry or memorandum. It was not secondary evidence in any proper sense of that term. It was not offered for the purpose of proving that a contract had been made between these parties at some previous time, and entered in the order-book, but as independent evidence that the defendant, by the terms of the letter, ordered certain liquors to be furnished to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bradlee v. Warren Five Cents Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Lowell Trust Co. v. WolffMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Abbott v. McAloonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1879
- Vlahou v. RodopoulosMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1946