Black v. Bachelder
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
CONTBAOT against Abram Bachelder and Joseph C. Bachelder to recover $300 for work done by the plaintiff in advertising their business.
Read the full summary
CONTBAOT against Abram Bachelder and Joseph C. Bachelder to recover $300 for work done by the plaintiff in advertising their business. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J., without a jury, the following facts were found: The plaintiff, in January, 1873, was the proprietor and pub« lisher of a monthly magazine published in the city of New York, and one Nelson was his authorized agent to make contracts for advertisements in the magazine, and as such agent on January 24, 1873, made the following contract in writing, signed “ A. Bachelder & Co.,” with the defendant Joseph C.…
1Opinion of the CourtA Mbs, J.
At the trial in the Superior Court, no question was raised as to the admissibility of the evidence, and each party was allowed to offer proof as to his understanding of the contract. But although this mode of trial must be considered as a waiver of all objection to the admissibility of the evidence, its legal effect, when so admitted, is still to be considered by the court. There is nothing in the report of the case to indicate that the parties intended to make the presiding judge a mere referee, or that he was to try the case, upon the evidence, otherwise than in accordance with established…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Mears v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Robinson v. Trustees of the New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Boston Supply Co. v. RubinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Page v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Nagel v. Modern Investment CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.