Legal Opinion

Haskins v. D'Este

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 7, 1882PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtW. Allen, J.

The St. of 1877, c. 163, provides that “ any signature to a written instrument declared on or set forth as a cause of action or ground of defence or set-off, in an action at law, shall be taken as admitted, unless the party sought to be charged thereby shall file in court, within the time allowed for answer, a special denial of the genuineness of such signature and a demand that the party relying thereon shall prove the same at the trial.”

The two defendants were sued in a writ which describes them as “ late copartners under the firm name and style of D’Este & Co.,” and the declaration alleges…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mahaiwe Bank v. DouglassSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1862

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Scholl v. GilmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
  2. Graustein v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  3. Munro v. HuberCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
  4. Talo v. TavaiHigh Court of American Samoa · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API