Legal Opinion
Vorsec Co. v. Gilkey
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided January 17, 1934PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHudson, J.
Case reported to “Law Court for its determination upon so much of the evidence as is legally admissible.”
Action of trover by the successor of a conditional sale vendor against a real estate mortgagee for alleged conversion of property described in the declaration of the writ as: “one 30 x 48 Vorcolne Ace Lo-Front Washer of the value of three hundred dollars; one *31332 x 40 Vorcolne Junior Tumbler of the value of seven hundred and fifty dollars; one 26-inch Vorcolne Ace Extractor of the value of three hundred and fifty dollars; one 40-inch Vorcolne Drying Cabinet of the value of two hundred and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hunt v. Bay State Iron Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Southbridge Savings Bank v. Exeter Machine WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Meagher v. HayesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Thompson v. VintonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Paine v. McDowellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lewiston Bottled Gas Co. v. Key Bank of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
- Wedge v. ButlerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1939
- Cumberland County Power & Light Co. v. Hotel AmbassadorSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1936
- Houlton Sav. Bank v. American Laundry Machinery Co.District Court, D. Maine · 1934