Bartlett v. Hawley
This text of 120 Mass. 92 (Bartlett v. Hawley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
No error of law, prejudicial to the defendants, is shown in the rulings below. The evidence warranted the in» [94]*94ference that the bill and protest were forwarded to the plaintiff upon the next day and by the next mail after the protest, and were received by the defendants as soon as if they had been forwarded directly to them. Cabot Bank v. Warner, 10 Allen, 522. The defendants appeared upon the face of the bill to be themselves the payees and indorsers, the word “ agents ” was a mere designatio personarum, and paroi evidence was inadmissible to discharge them. Tucker Manufacturing Co. v. Fairbanks, 98 Mass. 101. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
120 Mass. 92, 1876 Mass. LEXIS 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartlett-v-hawley-mass-1876.