Wheeler v. Russell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated 13th June, 1816, foi 381 dollars, 6 cents, payable by the defendant to the plaintiff on demand; and a count for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated 13th June, 1816, foi 381 dollars, 6 cents, payable by the defendant to the plaintiff on demand; and a count for money had and received. Trial on the general issue, before Putnam, J., May term, 1820. It was in evidence that the consideration of the note was a quantity of shingles sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, which were not of the quality required by the statute of 1783, c. 15. The question of law, arising out of this fact, was reserved for the consideration of the whole Court; it having been proved that the bill of parcels of the shingles, and…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chief Justice observed, that the cause had been so elaborately argued on both sides, and the points and authorities so thoroughly displayed, that it was quite unnecessary for the Court to go into a formal discussion of the case. They were all of opinion that the shingles, for the price of which the note in suit was given, having been sold in direct violation of the statute, the consideration of the promise was clearly illegal, and insufficient to support it. No principle of law, his honor added, is better settled than that no action will lie upon a contract made in violation of a statute,…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Martin v. ZellerbachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Peck v. VandenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Washburn Mill Co. v. BartlettNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Pate v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1854
- Rhine v. EllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.