Wilson v. Bicknell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Conteact upon the following instrument: “ Boston, Jan. 3, 1891. I hereby agree by and with Carlos Wilson, of Boston, to reimburse him for any loss of the hundred shares of the International Port Electric Stock purchased by him of me this day, Jan. 3,1891, at or before the expiration of five years from this date, at six per cent interest.
Read the full summary
Conteact upon the following instrument: “ Boston, Jan. 3, 1891. I hereby agree by and with Carlos Wilson, of Boston, to reimburse him for any loss of the hundred shares of the International Port Electric Stock purchased by him of me this day, Jan. 3,1891, at or before the expiration of five years from this date, at six per cent interest. Witness: Edward H. Pierce, Thomas W. Bicknell (seal).” Writ dated September 4, 1895. The declaration alleged that the shares were a total loss to the plaintiff, and were worth nothing, and he sought to recover the total amount of the purchase price, namely,…
1Opinion of the CourtLathrop, J.
A promise to pay a person “ at or before ” a day named is a promise to pay on the day named, the promisor having the option to pay before that time. Mattison v. Marks, 31 Mich. 421. See also Hubbard v. Mosely, 11 Gray, 170; Reed v. Kilburn Co-operative Society, L. R. 10 Q. B. 264. As this action was brought before the expiration of the five years named in the agreement declared on, it was prematurely brought if the words “ at or before ” relate to the word “ reimburse.” This *260proposition is not disputed by the plaintiff. He- however contends that the language used is to be construed as a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mattison v. MarksMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Belcher v. LovelandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pagal v. NickelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Reynolds v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1943