Huntsman v. Nichols
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a promissory note for $300 dated October 7, 1871, made by C. M. Fairbanks, payable to the defendant four months after date, and alleged to be indorsed by him to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Contract upon a promissory note for $300 dated October 7, 1871, made by C. M. Fairbanks, payable to the defendant four months after date, and alleged to be indorsed by him to the plaintiff. The answer denied the making and indorsing of the note, and alleged that the plaintiff had agreed with the defendant to submit the case to referees, who decided that the alleged indorsement by the defendant was not genuine, and that the plaintiff was therefore estopped to prove the indorsement genuine. Trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as…
1Opinion of the CourtDevens, J.
Several exceptions have been taken to the rulings of the presiding judge, and the evidence admitted by him, which may be considered in their order.
1. The admission of evidence in rebuttal of the defendant’s case, which should more properly have been offered by the plaintiff in chief, was clearly within the discretion of the court, and the exceptions do not show that it was not thus admitted. The point is too well settled to require the citation of authorities.
2. Although only the authenticity of the note in suit was in issue, yet the business transactions between Fairbanks and the defendant…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Hamburg-American Steam Packet Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
- State v. WithamSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1881
- Reeve v. DennettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Baldwin v. MosesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- O'Neill v. WallMontana Supreme Court · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.