Legal Opinion

Thomas v. Burnce

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 4, 1916PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPierce, J.

The facts intended to be stated in the bill of complaint are that the plaintiff before July 19, 1911, the day of the enactment of St. 1911, c. 727, was a borrower and the defendant a lender of sums of money less than $300 at rates of interest greater than is permitted by § 3 of that act; that before the enactment of that act with each loan a note was given in amount corresponding to the sum of money actually lent; that after the enactment of the act the plaintiff continued to borrow and the defendant to lend as before sums of money in each instance less than $300 at rates of interest…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Horner v. NitschCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1906
  2. Bennett v. Tremont Securities Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Bernhardt v. Atlantic Finance Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  2. Beach Associates, Inc. v. FauserMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
  3. Cuneo v. BornsteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  4. Maguire v. ReoughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  5. Chamberlain v. JamesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936

7 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