Raymond v. City of Worcester
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, to recover the amount of a tax assessed upon a stock of goods in the defendant city, and demanded of and paid by the plaintiff under protest. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Richardson, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The tax was on personal property, and was assessed as of May 1, 1891, against George J. Raymond and Company.
Read the full summary
Contract, to recover the amount of a tax assessed upon a stock of goods in the defendant city, and demanded of and paid by the plaintiff under protest. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Richardson, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The tax was on personal property, and was assessed as of May 1, 1891, against George J. Raymond and Company. The plaintiff testified that he resided in Cambridge in May and June, 1896 ; that in May, 1891, he resided in the same place, and was not the owner of any stock in trade in the defendant city in 1891; that he…
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
At the close of the evidence, the plaintiff requested the court to rule that he had made out his case, and that the defendant had established no defence. The court re*210fused so to rule, and found that the plaintiff was the owner of the stock of goods, or had such an interest in them as to be liable for the tax. The only question presented by the bill of exceptions is whether, upon the evidence, the judge was bound, as matter of law, to find for the plaintiff. It was an undisputed fact that the goods belonged to some one who did business under the name of George J. Raymond and Company. The…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lindenbaum v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Cohen v. LongariniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Brush v. City of New BedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925