Legal Opinion
Putnam v. Handy
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 7, 1924PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.
The defendant having waived his exceptions to the master’s report and not having appealed from the interlocutory decree confirming the report, the question for decision is, whether, on the pleadings and the report, with such reasonable inferences of fact therefrom as the trial court could draw, the final decree should be reversed. Forino Co. Inc. v. Karnheim, 240 Mass. 574, 580.
The plaintiff is the duly appointed trustee in bankruptcy of the United States Leatheroid and Rubber Company, a domestic corporation which was adjudged a bankrupt on May 4, 1921. The defendant, who was a director and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- von Arnim v. American Tube WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- United Zinc Companies v. HarwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Cosmopolitan Trust Co. v. MitchellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- United Drug Co. v. CordleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Raynes v. SharpMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Calkins v. Wire Hardware Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Malden Trust Co. v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Baker v. JamesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
- Beaudette v. GrahamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Manning v. CampbellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.