Smith v. Inhabitants of Holyoke
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tobt for an injury alleged to have been received by the plaintiff, February 20, 1870, througn a defect in a highway, in Holyoke.
Read the full summary
Tobt for an injury alleged to have been received by the plaintiff, February 20, 1870, througn a defect in a highway, in Holyoke. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Allen, J., the defendants admitted the obligation of the town to keep the highway in repair, and claimed that if any injury had been suffered by the plaintiff, she had been paid and fully satisfied for the same; and, by the consent of the plaintiff, filed an additional answer alleging payment and satisfaction, and setting forth the following receipt: “Yergennes, Yt., June 22, 1870. Received of the town of Holyoke, Mass.,…
1Opinion of the CourtGbAY, C. J.
Upon the testimony of the plaintiff that she did not know the terms of the paper signed by her until it was read at the trial, the offer to return the money paid her was made within a reasonable time, if any return was necessary.
The plaintiff’s testimony as to the reasons for destroying the letters was sufficient to warrant the presiding judge in finding, as matter of fact, that they were not destroyed with any fraudulent or improper intent. Oriental Bank v. Haskins, 3 Met. 332. And his finding upon that question of fact cannot be revised by this court. Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clinkinbeard v. ClinkinbeardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
3Cited by11 opinions
- Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Bliss v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- O'Donnell v. Inhabitants of ClintonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Wagner v. National Life Ins. Co. of MontpelierCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
- Mullen v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.