Bolton v. Bolton
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. Assumpsit for money had and received. The opinion states the case and the material facts. cited, on defendant’s exceptions: R. S., c. 55, § 5; Schunck v. Gegenseitiger, <&c. 44 Wis. 369; Mrdmann y. Mutual Ins. Go. 44 Wis. 376; Kentucky Masonic Ins. Go. v. Miller, 13 Bush. 489; Masons’ Benev. Soc. v. Winthrop, 85 111. 537; Same v. Baldwin, 86 111. 479 ; State v. Mut. Benev. Soc. 22 Alb. L. J. 427; State v. Mut.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. Assumpsit for money had and received. The opinion states the case and the material facts. cited, on defendant’s exceptions: R. S., c. 55, § 5; Schunck v. Gegenseitiger, <&c. 44 Wis. 369; Mrdmann y. Mutual Ins. Go. 44 Wis. 376; Kentucky Masonic Ins. Go. v. Miller, 13 Bush. 489; Masons’ Benev. Soc. v. Winthrop, 85 111. 537; Same v. Baldwin, 86 111. 479 ; State v. Mut. Benev. Soc. 22 Alb. L. J. 427; State v. Mut. Benefit Soc. 105 Mass. 149; Bliss, Life Ins. § 463; Goles v. Iowa St. Mut. Ins. Go. 18 Iowa, 425; Simeral v. Ins. Go.-18 Iowa, 319; Treadway v. Ins. Go. 29 Conn. 68; Gom.…
1Opinion of the CourtVirgin, J.
In 1846, one Bolton married the plaintiff in Boston, and on the same day went with his wife to the homestead of his father, in Manchester, where they resided and cohabited about eight months, when they moved to Lowell, where they resided and kept house some four or five months, during the latter part of which period, a child was born to them. Soon afterward, they removed with their child to Manchester, where they continued to reside some less than a year, when Bolton left his family say*302ing he was going to California; since which time the plaintiff never heard from him or of him, until after…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Campbell v. New England Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Maryland Mutual Benevolent Society of the Improved Order of Red Men v. ClendinenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
- Collins v. HoxieNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
- State v. Bankers' & Merchants' Mutual Benefit Ass'nSupreme Court of Kansas · 1880
- Arthur v. Odd Fellows Beneficial Ass'nOhio Supreme Court · 1876
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Supreme Commandery of the Knights of the Golden Rule v. AinsworthSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
- Societe Francaise De Bienfaisance Mutuelle De Los Angeles v. FlintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Toomey v. Supreme Lodge Knights of PythiasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Modern Woodmen of America v. HeadleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
- Supreme Lodge, Ancient Order United Workmen v. HutchinsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.