Legal Opinion

Inhabitants of Wellesley v. Washburn

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 9, 1892PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

This is a petition for review, under the Pub. Sts. c. 187, § 17. By § 19 of the same chapter the petitioner is *360required to give to the adverse party a bond with sufficient sureties, etc. The respondent moved to dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction, on the ground that there was no sufficient bond. The bond in this case was not signed by the petitioner as principal, but by one of the selectmen, the other two signing as sureties. But this was authorized by the Pub. Sts. c. 161, § 104, to the effect that any bond required to be given by a party in the course of a civil suit or proceeding…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Townsend v. HoyleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
  2. City of Boston v. RobbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  3. Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co. v. BurlinghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
  4. Norris v. MunroeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  5. Rawson v. DofnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  2. Nelson v. ReinhartNevada Supreme Court · 1923

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

Powered by the Exa API