Legal Opinion

Mee v. Fay

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 2, 1906PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBbALEY, J.

This is an action of contract in which the plaintiff, duly appointed under R. L. c. 145, § 19, the guardian of Harold Fay and Lillian Fay, sues to recover as a part of his wards’ estate a fund in possession of the defendant, who in defence claims to hold it on a trust for their benefit. At a trial without a jury in the Superior Court this defence prevailed, and the case is before us on a report of the presiding judge.

The first embarrassment arises from want of proper parties plaintiff, but this difficulty is removed because the report states that if it becomes necessary the plaintiff may…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Supreme Council American Legion of Honor v. PerryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
  2. Gerrish v. New Bedford Institution for SavingsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  3. Dodge v. Boston & Bangor Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
  4. Davis v. CoburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  5. Kendrick v.RayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kerr v. CraneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  2. Dolezal v. BostickSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  3. O'Hara v. O'HaraMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  4. Russell v. MeyersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  5. Chase v. FaulknerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940

4 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