Farley v. Rodocanachi

100 Mass. 427
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1868
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 100 Mass. 427 (Farley v. Rodocanachi) 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.

Bluebook
Farley v. Rodocanachi, 100 Mass. 427 (Mass. 1868).

Opinion

Colt, J.

The finding of the jury in favor of' the defendant renders it unnecessary to inquire into the accuracy of the several rulings which related to the damages that were to be assessed only in the event of a verdict for the plaintiff.

The defendant, in his examination as a witness, was properly permitted to testify to what was said to him by the plaintiff, as a part of one of the conversations deemed material by the plaintiff, a portion of which he had testified to; upon the familiar principle, that, when a part of a conversation or admission is introduced, the other side may prove all that was said.

The plaintiff cannot in this action recover for the fraud or false representations, if any, of the defendant, or for a conversion or unlawful detention of his property under the claim of a lien for advances. The action is upon a contract.

The jury found for the defendant, under instructions that the burden was upon the plaintiff to prove the contract substantially as stated in his declaration, and if he failed the defendant would be entitled to a verdict. They also stated, in answer to the court, that they found the contract as claimed by the defendant. These findings render it unnecessary to consider the further instructions given, or those asxed by the plaintiff.

Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Commonwealth v. Watson
388 N.E.2d 680 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1979)
Commonwealth v. Taylor
100 N.E.2d 22 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1951)
Commonwealth v. Armstrong
32 N.E. 1032 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 Mass. 427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farley-v-rodocanachi-mass-1868.