Legal Opinion

Foternick v. Watson

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 19, 1903PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Contract for alleged breach of a contract in writing. Writ dated November 4, 1899. In the Superior Court Stevens, J. made the ruling stated in the opinion. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiffs alleged exceptions.

1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.

In this case the jury were warranted in finding the following facts: The plaintiff Foternick is a builder by *188trade. He wished to construct some houses on a parcel of land on which there was a mortgage for $10,800. Before buying the land or otherwise entering upon the undertaking he applied to the defendant for what is generally known as a construction loan, and on April 13,1899, Foterniek and the plaintiff Lavinsky, in whose name Foterniek proposed to take title as a matter of convenience, entered into a written contract with the defendant, whereby the defendant agreed to lend "the plaintiffs…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Daniels v. NewtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  2. Parker v. RussellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
  3. Lowe v. HarwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
  4. Carpenter v. HolcombMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  5. Scanlan v. GeddesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Barrie v. QuinbyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  2. Leigh v. RuleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  3. New York Central Railroad v. StonemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
  4. Hawkes v. KehoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  5. Beach & Clarridge Co. v. American Steam Gauge & Valve Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API