Legal Opinion

Barringer v. Northridge

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 27, 1929PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rügg, C.J.

This suit, brought to settle complicated accounts between the plaintiff and defendant, was begun by trustee writ in common form. G. L. c. 214, § 7. William H. Northridge as executor was named as trustee and due service was made upon him. According to the record before us, the trustee does not seem to have appeared at the return day, nor to have filed an answer. The case was referred to a master. After the filing of his report, on June 26, 1926, orders for decrees were made in these words: “This suit was heard on the master’s report. Let an interlocutory decree be prepared confirming…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. United States v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. Commonwealth v. DascalakisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  3. Randall v. Peerless Motor Car Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  4. Exporters of Manufacturers' Products, Inc. v. Butterworth-Judson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
  5. Pizer v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Peterson v. HopsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  2. Goulet v. Whitin MacHine Works, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  3. Check v. KaplanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Santa Maria v. TrottoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  5. Vincent v. PleckerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946

24 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