Legal Opinion

Phinney v. Friedman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 22, 1916PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.

The defendants, as assignees under an assignment at common law for the benefit of creditors of the R. & G. Shoe Company, to which reference subsequently will be made as the company, received as part of its assets two cases of cut leather soles bought of the plaintiffs by the company in two shipments, one on February 28 and the other on March 31, 1913. And upon being informed of the assignment, which was dated April 9, 1913, the sellers demanded a return of the goods because, as they alleged, the sales having been induced by the fraud of the company, no title passed. The defendants having…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Brown v. LeachMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
  2. Barron v. International Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
  3. Watson v. SilsbyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
  4. Ayers v. FarwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  2. Berry v. KyesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  3. Brown v. Little, Brown & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  4. Windram Manufacturing Co. v. Boston Blacking Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  5. Benjamin Foster Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945

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

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

Powered by the Exa API