Bollwerk v. Hirshon
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a bond to dissolve an attachment. Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated January 21, 1916. On removal to the Superior Court the action was tried before Hall, J. The material evidence is described in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Contract upon a bond to dissolve an attachment. Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated January 21, 1916. On removal to the Superior Court the action was tried before Hall, J. The material evidence is described in the opinion. The judge at the close of the plaintiffs’ evidence ruled that the defendants had not received such notice of the plaintiffs’ notice to amend as was required by statute, and by his order a verdict was returned for the defendants; and the plaintiffs alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Courcy, J.
The plaintiffs brought an action against the Atlantic Oil Company; and that company as principal and the present defendants as sureties executed the bond to dissolve an attachment which is now in suit. Subsequently a motion to amend the writ was allowed, striking out the description of the plaintiffs therein as “H. Bowlwerk 8s Brother, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Missouri and having a usual place of business at St. Louis in said State,” and substituting "Henry Bollwerk and Joseph Bollwerk, both of the . city of St. Louis, State of Missouri, and doing business in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Doran v. CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Norris v. AndersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Cain v. RockwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Mathews Slate Co. v. SweeneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Sanderson v. StevensMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Savage v. WelchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Connelly v. Dionne Trucking, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920