Page v. Johnston
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Conteact for the alleged breach of an agreement in writing printed below. Writ dated February 15, 1909. The agreement declared upon was as follows: “ Agreement made this 29th day of May, A. D. 1908, between John J. Johnston, jr., of Boston of the first part, and Benjamin V. Page of Brookline of the second part.
Read the full summary
Conteact for the alleged breach of an agreement in writing printed below. Writ dated February 15, 1909. The agreement declared upon was as follows: “ Agreement made this 29th day of May, A. D. 1908, between John J. Johnston, jr., of Boston of the first part, and Benjamin V. Page of Brookline of the second part. “The party of the first part hereby agrees to sell, and the party of the second part to purchase, a certain estate situated on Harvard Street and bounded as follows: Dorchester. “ Being the new three family apartment house nearest Talbot Ave. shown to party of the second part all…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The rule of damage was the excess of the value of the Harvard Street estate as it was represented to be over its value as it actually was, and to this excess the plaintiff was entitled immediately upon the delivery of the deeds passed under the agreement, irrespective of the question whether the deed was made to him or to some one at his request. Morse v. Hutchins, 102 Mass. 439, and cases there cited. The defendant could not relieve himself from the consequences of this rule by showing that the plaintiff had conveyed the property to some one else. Moreover the trial judge might have found…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morse v. HutchinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by4 opinions
- Neal v. JeffersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Parker v. LevinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Molnar v. BeriswellOhio Supreme Court · 1930
- Averill v. BoyerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1915