Russell v. Lathrop
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Writ of review of a judgment recovered by the defendant in review against the plaintiff in review on the following contract in writing, dated January 22, 1870, and signed by the plaintiff in review and James T. Frary: “ It is agreed between H. A. Lathrop of Sharon, and James T. Frary and Charles W. Russell of New York, that for services heretofore rendered by said Lathrop to said Frary and Russell, they shall procure from the Lamson & Goodnow Manufacturing Company for him a…
Read the full summary
Writ of review of a judgment recovered by the defendant in review against the plaintiff in review on the following contract in writing, dated January 22, 1870, and signed by the plaintiff in review and James T. Frary: “ It is agreed between H. A. Lathrop of Sharon, and James T. Frary and Charles W. Russell of New York, that for services heretofore rendered by said Lathrop to said Frary and Russell, they shall procure from the Lamson & Goodnow Manufacturing Company for him a license to manufacture at his said Lathrop’s works, in Sharon, aforesaid, and not elsewhere, and sell three thousand…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
In the original action the plaintiff sought to recover three thousand dollars under a written contract signed by Russell and Frary. The point of the contract on which he relied is as follows : “ And they also agree to pay said Lathrop three thousand dollars when and as soon as said company shall have obtained a decree or judgment establishing the validity of said patent; and said Lathrop agrees that he will use his best endeavors to aid in establishing the validity of said patent, when*426ever he shall be called upon to do so by said Frary and Russell, or said company.”
The execution of the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Brown v. FalesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885