Stoneham Five Cents Savings Bank v. Johnson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtLummus, J.
The adoption by the trial judge of the practice, already disapproved by this court, of granting or denying by reference numbered requests for findings of fact, which have to be compared and fitted with each other and with other findings made in narrative form, has unnecessarily increased the difficulty of discovering and stating the facts. Manfredi v. O’Brien, 282 Mass. 458, 460. Zarthar v. Saliba, 282 Mass. 558, 560. Peabody Gas & Oil Co. v. Standard Oil Co. of New York, 284 Mass. 87, 92.
On April 11, 1929, one David H. Pingree borrowed $6,000 from the plaintiff bank, and gave therefor his…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Glass v. HulbertMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Sexton v. Kessler & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Zartman v. First Nat. Bank of WaterlooSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Howland v. StoweMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Parker v. NickersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Hendrickson v. SearsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- City of Boston v. DolanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- State Ex Rel. Norvell v. Credit Bureau of Albuquerque, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1973
- Hoffman v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1943
- In Re American Bridge Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.