Legal Opinion

Hashem v. Massachusetts Security Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 25, 1926PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarroll, J.

These are two actions of tort to recover because of the defendant’s deceit in fraudulently inducing the plaintiffs to invest their money with the defendant corporation, The cases were heard upon the auditor’s report. No additional evidence was introduced “other than the reading of excerpts from the transcript of the testimony taken at the trial before the auditor.” The judge found for the plaintiff Hashem in the sum of $671.24, and for the plaintiff Moroganes in the sum of $630.90. He found as a fact that fraudulent representations were made; that the plaintiff in each case could not read and…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Grace v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  2. Bliss v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  3. O'Donnell v. Inhabitants of ClintonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
  4. Trambly v. RicardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
  5. Tremont Trust Co. v. BurackMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Bates v. SouthgateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
  2. Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1974
  3. Boston Five Cents Savings Bank v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
  4. McCarthy v. Brockton National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  5. New England Foundation Co. v. Elliott & Watrous, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940

5 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