Bartlett v. Holbrook
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Covenant by the administrator of John Floyd, against Samuel F. Holbrook and James Dillon, on the following instrument, signed and sealed by the defendants: “ To all persons to whom these presents shall come: Know ye that we, Samuel F. Holbrook and James Dillon, of the city of Boston, Massachusetts, separately and jointly do bind ourselves, our heirs and assigns, to do and perform as hereinafter mentioned.
Read the full summary
Covenant by the administrator of John Floyd, against Samuel F. Holbrook and James Dillon, on the following instrument, signed and sealed by the defendants: “ To all persons to whom these presents shall come: Know ye that we, Samuel F. Holbrook and James Dillon, of the city of Boston, Massachusetts, separately and jointly do bind ourselves, our heirs and assigns, to do and perform as hereinafter mentioned. That is to say, to pay unto Mr. John Floyd, of Kittery, county of York, State of Maine, his heirs or assigns, the sum of five hundred dollars, for the grant of a patent right for the…
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The contract of the parties was executed; the consideration of the grant was paid, and invested in the dry dock. Of one ninth part of the dry dock Floyd became the owner, and as such, as well as under the express covenants of the defendants, entitled to his share of the profits of its use. The defendants have recognized such title, and from time to time, until the decease of Floyd, have accounted and settled with him upon that basis. If it were competent for the defendants to show a failure of consideration for the share of Floyd, the facts offered in evidence fall far short of such proof.…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Rhodes v. AshurstIllinois Supreme Court · 1898