Corrigan v. People's Building, Loan, & Saving Ass'n
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Two actions OE contract, the first count of each declaration declaring on a promise alleged to be contained in the certificate of the defendant for five shares therein held by the plaintiff as stockholder to pay the plaintiff $100 for each share in five years from the date of the certificate or at the maturity thereof; and the second count of each declaration declaring on an account annexed to recover sixty monthly payments of $5 each and twenty quarterly payments of $1.25…
Read the full summary
Two actions OE contract, the first count of each declaration declaring on a promise alleged to be contained in the certificate of the defendant for five shares therein held by the plaintiff as stockholder to pay the plaintiff $100 for each share in five years from the date of the certificate or at the maturity thereof; and the second count of each declaration declaring on an account annexed to recover sixty monthly payments of $5 each and twenty quarterly payments of $1.25 each made by the plaintiff to the defendant, in the case of Patrick J. Corrigan between March 1, 1890, and February 28,…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, C. J.
In these cases there had been no previous trial, or election to sue on the covenant, and it was understood that the plaintiffs might recover the withdrawal or book value of their stock irrespective of the pleadings, if they were entitled to that upon the facts. In other respects the cases are like Daley v. People’s Building, Loan & Savings Association, ante, and are governed by it.
If we assume that the jury would have been warranted in finding that when the plaintiffs sought to withdraw the defendant made false pretences and set up a forfeiture knowing that it had no right to do so, still in…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Tozier v. Haverhill & Amesbury Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905