Legal Opinion
Porshin v. Snider
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided December 3, 1965PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpalding, J.
This is an action of contract in two counts. One is against the Universal Shoe Corporation (Universal) ; the other is against Hyman Snider individually.
The evidence most favorable to the plaintiff is as follows. In April, 1945, Snider “negotiated with the plaintiff . . . to come to work in Sanford, Maine . . . [for Universal] at . . . ($125.00) per week, plus board and room valued at . . . ($30.00) per week.” At this time the plaintiff was employed as a stitching room foreman in a shoe factory in Haverhill at $100 per week. The plaintiff had been in the shoe business since 1905 and was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Carnig v. CarrMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Cass v. LordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Braden v. Trustees of Phillips AcademyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Simonelli v. Boston Housing AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
- Goodenough v. ThayerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Paterson-Leitch Company, Inc. v. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Robert Goldman v. First National Bank of BostonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- Cort v. Bristol-Myers Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- O'Brien v. Analog Devices, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.