Legal Opinion

Raymond v. Davies

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 2, 1936PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCrosby, J.

This is an action of contract upon an account annexed to recover salary due and money lent. *118The case was referred to an auditor under an order that his findings of fact were to be final by agreement of the parties. The plaintiff filed a motion* that the auditor’s report be confirmed, and that judgment be entered for the plaintiff. The report constituted a case stated under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 231, § 126. Merrimac Chemical Co. v. Moore, 279 Mass. 147. Beckwith v. Boylston, 284 Mass. 279, 280. Upon the hearing of the motion the defendant filed the following requests for rulings: "1. Upon all…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Little v. PhippsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Merrimac Chemical Co. v. MooreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Quinn v. BurtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Dzuris v. PierceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  5. J. C. Penney Co. v. Schulte Real Estate Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Schock v. NashSupreme Court of Delaware · 1999
  2. Chelsea Industries, Inc. v. GaffneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  3. Zakibe v. Ahrens & McCarron, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. Shulkin v. ShulkinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  5. Production MacHine Co. v. HoweMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951

16 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