Legal Opinion
Marshall v. James
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided May 20, 1925PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarroll, J.
This action of contract under R. L. c. 99, §§ 4-7, (see now G. L. c. 137, §§ 4-7,) is to recover payments made on wagering transactions in the year 1911. The case was referred to an auditor and was tried before a judge of the Superior Court without a jury, who found for the plaintiff.
The auditor found that the plaintiff did not concern himself whether the defendants actually made purchases and sales, and, in effect, found that the plaintiff had no positive, affirmative intention as to purchases and sales. The trial judge so found. Most of the transactions were short sales in which the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Adams v. DickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
- Greene v. CoreyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Fiske v. DoucetteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Zembler v. FitzgeraldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Adams v. HaydenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ryan v. WhitneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Papadopulos v. BrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
- Grace v. LivingstoneDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1961
- Marshall v. WillistonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Capitol Bank & Trust Co. v. CowanMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.