Marks v. Metropolitan Stock Exchange
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, under St. 1890, c. 437, for $400 alleged to have been paid upon contracts for the purchase of stock which the plaintiff had no intention to perform and which the defendant had no reasonable cause to believe the plaintiff intended to perform. Writ dated May 18, 1901. At the trial in the Superior Court before Hardy, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.
The transaction which the husband of the plaintiff testified that he entered into with the defendant corporation *252in her behalf is the typical transaction aimed at by the first clause of the second section of St. 1890, c. 437.
He testified that he went to the defendant’s office and, through one Nichols, whom he met there, paid to the defendant $200 and received from "it a contract whereby the defendant promised “ on three days’' notice ” to deliver to Nichols twenty shares of the stock of the United States Steel Company “ at 53 1-4 and the holder of this contract agrees to receive the same; or…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rice v. WinslowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Crandell v. WhiteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Ballou v. WilleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
3Cited by10 opinions
- Anderson v. Metropolitan Stock ExchangeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Picard v. BeersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Marcy v. Shelburne Falls & Colrain Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Zembler v. FitzgeraldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Barrell v. PaineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.