Parker v. Kenyon
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tobt for the conversion of a promissory note made by the defendant and payable to the plaintiff, which it was alleged the defendant took for the purpose of casting the interest due, and retained under the pretence that she had paid it. The defence was that the note had been actually paid.
Read the full summary
Tobt for the conversion of a promissory note made by the defendant and payable to the plaintiff, which it was alleged the defendant took for the purpose of casting the interest due, and retained under the pretence that she had paid it. The defence was that the note had been actually paid. The action was originally brought in the Police Court of the town of Lee, where the defendant moved that it be dismissed because the writ was issued September 20, 1870, and made returnable “ the third day of October next,” while the summons served upon the defendant bore date September 20, 1860, and…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The mistake in the date of the summons was a defect in the form of the process necessary to bring the defendant before the court; and upon a motion to dismiss for that cause, the decision of the judge presiding in the Superior Court is final. Gen. Sts. c. 115, § 7.
The evidence excluded was immaterial. The trial on the indictment was res inter alios, to which the plaintiff was not a party. And the issue of larceny on that trial was different from the issue of conversion in this action; the one involved a question of intent; the other might be under a claim of right.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Pilos v. First National Stores Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Fowle v. ChildMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Silva v. SilvaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Kimball v. SweetMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Bishop v. DonnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.