Legal Opinion

Martin v. Murphy

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 20, 1914PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.

The allegations of the original bill, admitted by the answers, show that, having assigned to the defendants Maria E. Hatch and Lucy P. Hatch a half interest in the second mortgage, the plaintiff is in equity entitled only to the other half, although appearing of record to be the sole owner. It is also unquestioned, that, solely for the purpose of effecting a foreclosure, assignments were given to the defendants Augustin V. Murphy and C. William Hunt, with the understanding that they were to act in the interest of their respective principals. A foreclosure sale under the instructions of the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. American Circular Loom Co. v. WilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  2. Boyden v. HillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  3. Earnshaw v. WhittemoreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Perry v. PyeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  5. Boland v. RossSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Foreign Auto Import, Inc. v. Renault Northeast, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Coe v. CoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  3. Potier v. A. W. Perry, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  4. Johnson v. MartignettiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  5. Glazer v. SchwartzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API