Heavor v. Page
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, against the executor of the will of Mary R. Popkin, for services rendered at her request. The writ, which was dated May 18, 1891, and returnable to the Superior Court for Suffolk County, described the plaintiff as “ of Chelsea ” in that county.
Read the full summary
Contract, against the executor of the will of Mary R. Popkin, for services rendered at her request. The writ, which was dated May 18, 1891, and returnable to the Superior Court for Suffolk County, described the plaintiff as “ of Chelsea ” in that county. The defendant answered in abatement, that, at the time of the death of the testatrix, she and the plaintiff each lived and had their usual places of business in Middlesex County, the former in Cambridge and the latter in Everett; and that at the time the action was begun the defendant lived and had his usual place of business in Cambridge,…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
Whatever may be our opinion upon the question sought to be raised by the defendant’s exceptions we cannot consider it, as the decision of the justice of the Superior Court was final. Guild v. Bonnemort, 156 Mass. 522. Pub. Sts. c. 152, § 10; c. 153, § 8.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Guild v. BonnemortMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kimball v. SweetMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Puritan Trust Co. v. CoffeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902