Legal Opinion

Riley v. Brusendorff

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 5, 1917PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Contbact to recover a commission as a broker for the sale of the fixtures, stock in trade, license and good will of the defendants’ liquor business, which had been carried on at 18 Eliot Street in Boston. Writ dated November 21, 1913. The plaintiff did not enter the writ on the return day, which was the first Monday of January, 1914, as he should have done. On February 5, 1914, a judge of the Superior Court made an order" allowing the late entry of the action.

Read the full summary

Contbact to recover a commission as a broker for the sale of the fixtures, stock in trade, license and good will of the defendants’ liquor business, which had been carried on at 18 Eliot Street in Boston. Writ dated November 21, 1913. The plaintiff did not enter the writ on the return day, which was the first Monday of January, 1914, as he should have done. On February 5, 1914, a judge of the Superior Court made an order" allowing the late entry of the action. On February 12, 1914, the defendants, appearing specially by their attorney, filed a motion to dismiss the action. On February 18,…

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C. J.

It is not necessary to decide whether there was an exception saved to the denial of the motion to dismiss. That motion related solely to a late entry of the writ. Before that motion was heard a general appearance had been entered for the defendants by a member of the bar. That cured whatever defect there was, if any, in the entry. A general appearance waives formal defects as to the getting of the defendant before the court. Henry v. Sweeney, 216 Mass. 112, and cases there collected. Hazard v. Wason, 152 Mass. 268, 270. Hyde Park v. Wiggin, 157 Mass. 94, 97. The authority of the attorney in…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Herrick v. WaittMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  2. Hector v. Boston Electric Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  3. Richards v. AppletMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  4. Hurley v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  5. In re CarverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Lawrence v. Board of Registration in MedicineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  2. Bar Ass'n v. CaseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  3. Commissioner of Banks v. Cosmopolitan Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
  4. Murphy v. Barry, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  5. Anti v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923

15 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