Lynch v. O'Donnell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on an account annexed for intoxicating liquors sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. That the goods were sold in violation of law. Trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance-as follows : The plaintiff contended that he sold the liquors to the defendant on the account of Patrick Bulman, upon the defendant’s original promise to pay for them.
Read the full summary
Contract on an account annexed for intoxicating liquors sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. That the goods were sold in violation of law. Trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance-as follows : The plaintiff contended that he sold the liquors to the defendant on the account of Patrick Bulman, upon the defendant’s original promise to pay for them. The plaintiff, after testifying to a conversation between himself and the defendant, tending to show the promise, proceeded to testify substantially as follows : “ The defendant said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The instructions given were sufficiently favorable to the defendant. The jury, under those instructions, have found that by the agreement and understanding of the parties the sale was complete at the plaintiff’s shop. This finding renders all questions as to the subsequent delivery to the carrier immaterial. JExceptions overruled.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Steiner v. TurnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911