Legal Opinion

Meehan v. Sharp

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 19, 1890PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Contract. The amended declaration alleged that the plaintiff sold and delivered all his right, title, and interest in and to fifty shares of the American Conduit and Construction Company, the stock of the company being then held under a pooling agreement by the directors, to the defendant, who agreed to pay him five dollars a share for the stock, but neglected and refused to pay the same.

Read the full summary

Contract. The amended declaration alleged that the plaintiff sold and delivered all his right, title, and interest in and to fifty shares of the American Conduit and Construction Company, the stock of the company being then held under a pooling agreement by the directors, to the defendant, who agreed to pay him five dollars a share for the stock, but neglected and refused to pay the same. Trial in the Superior Court, before Barker, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. There was evidence that the plaintiff orally agreed to sell to the defendant the shares in question,…

1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.

The plaintiff had a certificate showing that he was the beneficial owner of fifty shares of stock in a corpora*566tion. The shares had not been issued, but were held in pool, and were to be issued whenever the board of directors should vote to authorize a delivery of them, and, if they should not so vote within six months from the date of the certificate, were to be delivered to the plaintiff forthwith, on demand and the presentation of the certificate. Under the instructions of the presiding justice, the jury must have found that the defendant orally agreed with the plaintiff to buy of him the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Somerby v. BuntinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
  2. Dows v. . GreeneNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  3. Boardman v. CutterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  4. Audenried v. RandallUnited States Circuit Court · 1868

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hewson v. Peterman Manufacturing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Franklin v. Matoa Gold Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  3. Beacon Oil Co. v. PerelisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
  4. Cooper v. Vitraco, Inc.District Court, Virgin Islands · 1970
  5. Davis v. ArnoldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929

3 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