Bryant v. Peck & Whipple Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, alleging that the plaintiff, on or about December 16,1889, became a party to a promissory note for $2,000, with his son, George T. Bryant, running to the defendant corporation, and at the same time assigned to it in writing thirty shares of its capital stock owned by him, of the par value of $3,000; that there was no legal consideration for the plaintiff’s becoming a party to the note, or for such transfer of shares, but^the…
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, alleging that the plaintiff, on or about December 16,1889, became a party to a promissory note for $2,000, with his son, George T. Bryant, running to the defendant corporation, and at the same time assigned to it in writing thirty shares of its capital stock owned by him, of the par value of $3,000; that there was no legal consideration for the plaintiff’s becoming a party to the note, or for such transfer of shares, but^the plaintiff was induced to do both by the representations made to him by the defendant, and its officers and agents acting for…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
According to the allegations of the bill, the plaintiff became a party to the note from which he prays to be relieved, and transferred his stock, in consideration that the defendant would not prosecute his son for perjury, and under a threat from it that otherwise his son would be prosecuted. The transaction was illegal; Pub. Sts. c. 205, § 27; Gorham v. Keyes, 137 Mass. 583; and if the parties stood on an equal footing, neither of them would have a remedy against the other. Atwood v. Fisk, 101 Mass. 363. But it is well recognized that, although both parties are chargeable with knowledge that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Inhabitants of Worcester v. EatonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Atwood v. FiskMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Harris v. CarmodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Schoener v. . LissauerNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Belding v. SmytheMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- St. Louis, Vandalia & Terre Haute Railroad v. Terre Haute & Indianapolis RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Morse v. WoodworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Berman v. CoakleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Colby v. Title Insurance & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Kwentsky v. SirovySupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.