Legal Opinion

Northridge v. Grenier

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 15, 1932PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

This is an action to recover an instalment' due on a written instrument, with interest. The instrument was duly protested and the action is against the indorser. The instrument, otherwise a promissory note' payable to the defendant in quarterly specified instalments, contained these words: “. . . with the right to anticipate any or all payments at any time . . . .” The single question for decision is whether an instrument payable in instalments, indisputably a promissory note in every other particular, is rendered nonnegotiable by reason of the right reserved to anticipate payments.

The…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. WeloskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
  2. Union Trust Co. v. McGintyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  3. Main v. County of PlymouthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  4. Stults v. SilvaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
  5. Mahoney v. FitzpatrickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Madden v. Public Utility District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Neiss v. BurwenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  3. State v. PUDWashington Supreme Court · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API