Troeder v. Hyams
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon an attested promissory note, dated February 1, 1872, payable one month after date to the order of the plaintiff, and signed by the defendant. Writ dated December 12, 1887. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Barker, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions, which were allowed, and filed a motion for a new > trial, which was overruled. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
This is an action upon a witnessed promissory note, brought in the name of the payee by the holder, one Henry M. Hyams. The plaintiff Hyams’s case was, that the *538note was given originally to Troeder, the payee, for a consideration moving from Troeder, and that it was transferred to the plaintiff Hyams for value, about a month after its execution. Under the instructions given to the jury, they must have found these to be the facts. The note seems not to have been indorsed by Troeder until after this action was brought.
1. The first question is raised by a motion to dismiss the action, founded on…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Jones v. WitterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Merrill v. New England Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- New England Dredging Co. v. Rockport Granite Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Martin v. TapleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Atwood v. ScottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Piper v. ChildsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Ward v. Board of Aldermen of NewtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Westminster National Bank v. GrausteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
- Newell v. RosenbergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Boutelle v. CarpenterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.