Legal Opinion

Rosen v. United States Rubber Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 10, 1929PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

These are two actions, each against, the *405principal and surety on a replevin bond. The principal defendant in each case sued out a writ of replevin against the present plaintiff and thereby took from him certain merchandise. Each gave a bond (wherein was described the writ of replevin) with the condition that, if the principal (the plaintiff in replevin and the present principal defendant) “shall prosecute said action of replevin to final judgment, and shall pay such damages and costs as the said William C. Rosen, Assignee, shall recover against it and shall also return the property replevied,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. United Shoe MacHinery Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Swan v. Justices of Superior CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  3. Institution for Savings in Newburyport & Its Vicinity v. PufferMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
  4. Carroll v. BergerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
  5. Tucker v. Tremont Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MannosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  2. Allard v. EstesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  3. Long v. GeorgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  4. Rostykus v. Fidelity Finance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1950
  5. Securities Inv. Co. v. Pioneer Sales Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1942

8 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