Legal Opinion

Warner & Bailey Co. v. Fox

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided October 14, 1938Published

1Opinion of the CourtBolster, C. J.

This case has been held some time because of the pendency before the trial judge of a motion which, if allowed, would render decision here unnecessary. The judge has died and neither party has pushed the motion to decision. We, therefore, decide the appeal as it was left with us.

This ease was submitted on these agreed facts: that in 1927 the defendant, then a resident of Connecticut, became indebted to the plaintiff, a Connecticut corporation which has never had a place of business in Massachusetts. Payments were made, the last being on February 18, 1928.

The writ, dated October 19, 1934,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Breen v. BurnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  2. Currier v. StudleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
  3. Slocum v. RileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  4. Corliss Steam Engine Co. v. SchumacherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
  5. Goetz v. VoelingerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868

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

Powered by the Exa API