Legal Opinion

Cauman v. Biggar

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 28, 1925PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarroll, J.

These two actions were tried together. There was evidence that the plaintiff was induced to enter into a written lease of real estate to the Merchant Tailors’ Manufacturing Company, a Massachusetts corporation, hereinafter called the Company, as a result of fraudulent *92representations made by the defendant Walter Biggar, personally, and as agent of the other defendant. The misrepresentations were that the stock of the company to the extent of $50,000 had been subscribed for and $20,000 paid in in cash, when in fact, as the defendant Biggar knew, but $6,600 had been subscribed and only $4,400…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Deane v. CaldwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
  2. Towle v. Commissioner of BanksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  3. Walker v. RussellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
  4. Huntress v. BlodgettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  5. Hunnewell v. DuxburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Barrett Associates, Inc. v. AronsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1963
  2. Weiner v. LowensteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  3. Maryland Casualty Co. v. HosmerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1937
  4. Goebel v. Schmid Bros., Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1994
  5. Laker v. FreidDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1994

3 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