Emerson v. Wadman
This text of 122 Mass. 384 (Emerson v. Wadman) 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
Whether the first or the second count, each alleging that the note mentioned therein, though in terms payable to the plaintiff’s husband, was in fact payable to her, could be sustained, need not be considered; because the third count Was clearly sufficient, and all three were alleged to be for the same cause of action. The submission to arbitration did not oust the jurisdiction of the Superior Court, and in terms looked to a disposition of the suit after the award should be returned. The judgment does hot appear to have been rendered upon the [388]*388ft ward, but upon the default of the defendant, and for a less sum than was alleged in the third count to be due to the plaintiff; and the remitting by the plaintiff, in accordance with the award, of part of ■ the sum which she might have recovered, did not make the judgment erroneous. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
122 Mass. 384, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emerson-v-wadman-mass-1877.