Legal Opinion

Lane v. Sullivan

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 31, 1939PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.

The defendant’s demurrer was rightly sustained on the ground that the declaration fails to state any consideration for the defendant’s promise.

The declaration sets forth a promise in writing by the defendant to pay the plaintiff, upon certain contingencies, the sum of $4,000, “plus her share of the estate of Elizabeth Christmas.” No act is alleged to have been performed and no promise is alleged to have been given on the part of the plaintiff in exchange for the promise of the defendant. The statement that the plaintiff “has performed all of the obligations imposed upon her by the terms of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Davis v. H. S. & M. W. Snyder, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
  2. Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance v. BoyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  3. Newton Rubber Works v. GrahamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
  4. Wesalo v. Commissioner of InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Keljikian v. Star Brewing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  2. Damiano v. National Grange Mutual Liability Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  3. Beckford v. BeckfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
  4. Longo v. Depositors Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API