Coolidge v. Poor
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was assumpsit, to recover the balance of the plaintiff’s account for moneys advanced and paid by him for the use of the defendants; who pleaded certain laws of the state of Maryland, for the relief of insolvent debtors, in bar of the action; and the issue was, whether the cause of action accrued in Baltimore, in that state.
Read the full summary
This was assumpsit, to recover the balance of the plaintiff’s account for moneys advanced and paid by him for the use of the defendants; who pleaded certain laws of the state of Maryland, for the relief of insolvent debtors, in bar of the action; and the issue was, whether the cause of action accrued in Baltimore, in that state. On the trial of this issue before Jackson, J., it appeared that, at the time of the transactions between the parties upon which this action was founded, and ever since, the plaintiff was a merchant residing and doing business at Boston, and the defendants were…
1Per curiam
The single question, in this case, is whether, when a commission merchant, residing and transacting his business in this state, shall have occasion to sue his correspondent, living in another stale, for the balance of his account, the cause of action shall be said to have arisen here, or in such other state ; and we are all of opinion the cause of action arises here, and that judgment, in this ease, be entered upon the verdict, (a)
Vide Tappan vs. Poor & Al., ante, 419
2Cited by6 opinions
- Abell v. Penn Mutual Life InsuranceWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
- Andrews v. HerriotNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Boyle v. Zacharie & TurnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- So. Boston Iron Co. v. Boston Locomotive WorksSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1862
- Very v. McHenrySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1848
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.