Legal Opinion

Putnam v. Collamore

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 30, 1876PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal by John H. Collamore from a decree of the judge of probate, allowing the account of George Putnam, Jr., the administrator de bonis non, with the will annexed, of George W. Collamore, the ground of appeal being that the administrator should have charged himself in his account with three mortgages on a certain parcel of land in Richmond Street, Boston.

Read the full summary

Appeal by John H. Collamore from a decree of the judge of probate, allowing the account of George Putnam, Jr., the administrator de bonis non, with the will annexed, of George W. Collamore, the ground of appeal being that the administrator should have charged himself in his account with three mortgages on a certain parcel of land in Richmond Street, Boston. At the hearing in this court, before Wells, J., the question, whether the administrator should so have charged himself, was reserved for the full court on a statement of facts, the material parts of which appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtEndicott, J.

The transactions recited in this report are somewhat complicated, and a condensed statement of the facts, in the order of their occurrence, will render the case more intelligible.

In March, 1853, Elias W. Goddard, as the agent and for the benefit of George W. Collamore, the testator, purchased of David A. Dunbar an estate on Richmond Street and took a deed in his own name. The estate was then subject to a mortgage for $1000, given by a former owner to Willard W. Stevens. This mortgage was recited in the deed of Dunbar to Goddard, with an express stipulation that it should be assumed and paid…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Huxley v. RiceMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Carlton v. JacksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
  3. Thompson v. HeywoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  4. Cunningham v. BrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  5. Sheffield & B. Coal, Iron & Railway Co. v. NewmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1896

7 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