Legal Opinion
Gold Brand Confectionery, Inc. v. Dimick
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 9, 1931PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCrosby, J.
This is an action of contract in two counts to recover certain sums in excess of the agreed price for electricity during a period of years, which the plaintiff alleges were paid by it to the defendant. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. The case is here on the denial of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict.
The plaintiff, a candy manufacturer, was a tenant of the defendant of premises in Boston under two leases, the terms of which extended through the years 1922 to 1929, inclusive. Both leases were drawn by the defendant and each contained the following provision: “The…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Long v. Inhabitants of AtholMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Rosenfeld v. Boston Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Montgomery Door & Sash Co. v. Atlantic Lumber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- First National Bank v. City National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Alton v. First National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Allen v. Town of PlymouthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Cookson Group plc v. FlynnMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
- Town of Brookline v. Crane Construction Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America v. PaigeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- E. F. Hutton & Co. v. NourseMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.