Legal Opinion

Proctor v. Hartigan

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 24, 1885PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Coetbact against the defendant, as acceptor of the following order: “ #500. Boston, August 19, 1882. “ Bartholomew. J. Hartigan, pay to the order of Proctor & Drummey five hundred dollars, value received; and charge the same to account of James Walsh. “ To be paid out of the last payment. “ I accept this order. B. J. Hartigan.”

Read the full summary

Coetbact against the defendant, as acceptor of the following order: “ #500. Boston, August 19, 1882. “ Bartholomew. J. Hartigan, pay to the order of Proctor & Drummey five hundred dollars, value received; and charge the same to account of James Walsh. “ To be paid out of the last payment. “ I accept this order. B. J. Hartigan.” Answer, that the acceptance was conditional, and that the words “ To be paid out of the last payment ” related to and depended upon the performance of a contract, which, at the time of said acceptance, was in force between said Walsh and the defendant; that Walsh,…

1Opinion of the CourtW. Allen, J.

The words “ To he' paid out of the last payment ” were part of the defendant’s contract of acceptance; and evidence of the contract between the drawer and drawee, and of the conversation between the parties refering to it, was competent to aid in the construction of the writing by showing the facts and circumstances under which it was made. See Franklin Savings Institution v. Reed, 125 Mass. 365; Stoops v. Smith, 100 Mass. 63. . Exceptions sustained.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stoops v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  2. Franklin Savings Institution v. ReedMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. American Malting Co. v. Souther Brewing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  2. Berg v. EricksonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
  3. DeFriest v. BradleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
  4. Way v. GreerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  5. Kilby Mfg. Co. v. Hinchman-Renton Fire Proofing Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904

5 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