Dorr v. Fenno
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of covenant upon an indenture. The declaration sets forth, that the defendant, for the considerations mentioned in the indenture, assigned to the plaintiff all his, the defendant’s, claim against Ethel Olmstead, which was for a balance on taking an account of their mutual dealings ; that the defendant, among other things, covenanted with the plaintiff, “ that the said account was by him, as he believed, justly stated, and that he had received nothing on…
Read the full summary
This was an action of covenant upon an indenture. The declaration sets forth, that the defendant, for the considerations mentioned in the indenture, assigned to the plaintiff all his, the defendant’s, claim against Ethel Olmstead, which was for a balance on taking an account of their mutual dealings ; that the defendant, among other things, covenanted with the plaintiff, “ that the said account was by him, as he believed, justly stated, and that he had received nothing on account of it, other than what appeared in his books and the account stated, resulting in the balance aforesaid; ” and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was afterwards delivered by
Morton J.
This action is founded upon the covenants contained in an indenture, of which profert is made in the declaration. The defendant craves oyer of the indenture, which being granted, he sets out the whole instrument and pleads non est factum. There are also several other issues, all of which were found for the plaintiff.
After proof of the execution of the deed,1 the defendant objected to its admissibility, on the ground of a variance between the instrument and the declaration. This objection was overruled, and we have no doubt of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Grinnell v. PhillipsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1805
- Lessee of Cluggage v. SwainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1811
- Fuller v. HoldenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Warner v. RobinsonConnecticut Superior Court · 1790
- White v. WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ford v. H. W. Dubiskie & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927