Estabrook v. Swett
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon an account annexed. At the trial in the Su perior Court, without a jury, before Pitman, J., the following facts appeared: The plaintiffs sold the defendant the goods described in the account on a credit of thirty days; and at the end of this time the plaintiffs received of the defendant a promissory note of J. G. Robinson in payment, and receipted the bill for the goods.
Read the full summary
Contract upon an account annexed. At the trial in the Su perior Court, without a jury, before Pitman, J., the following facts appeared: The plaintiffs sold the defendant the goods described in the account on a credit of thirty days; and at the end of this time the plaintiffs received of the defendant a promissory note of J. G. Robinson in payment, and receipted the bill for the goods. There was evidence tending to show that the defendant made false and fraudulent representations to induce the plaintiffs to take the note. Before the note became due the plaintiffs discovered that the…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The plaintiffs in this case seek to recover on the original account, on the ground that they were induced to take the note of a third person in payment, through the fraud of the defendant. The plaintiffs have not proved that the note was absolutely worthless. They cannot therefore maintain this action without surrendering the note to the defendant. Coolidge v. Brigham, 1 Met. 547.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Batman v. MegowanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859
3Cited by18 opinions
- Mullen v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Snow v. AlleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- E. T. C. Corp. v. Title Guarantee & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Johnson v. BurnsideSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- Drohan v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.