Fish v. Gates

133 Mass. 441, 1882 Mass. LEXIS 252
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 16, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 133 Mass. 441 (Fish v. Gates) 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
Fish v. Gates, 133 Mass. 441, 1882 Mass. LEXIS 252 (Mass. 1882).

Opinion

Morton, C. J.

The defendant made a special contract with the plaintiffs as copartners to do work for him. In any suit to enforce this contract or any liability growing out of it, both partners must be joined as plaintiffs. The defendant contracted with them jointly, not with either of them separately. The dissolution of the partnership before the work was completed had no effect upon the rights or liability of the defendant. It did not authorize the plaintiffs to sever the contract and sue the defendant separately. They must still sue jointly. Page v. Wolcott, 15 Gray, 536. Having fully performed the contract on their part, so that nothing remains but a mere duty of the defendant to pay money, they may maintain either of the common counts which is appropriate. Morse v. Sherman, 106 Mass. 430. Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Joseph A. Previte, Inc. v. Bower
1983 Mass. App. Div. 242 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1983)
Berkman v. Ross
29 Mass. App. Dec. 190 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1964)
Shapira v. Budish
175 N.E. 159 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1931)
Egan v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance
266 Mass. 270 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1929)
Thomas v. Benson
163 N.E. 181 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1928)
Katzeff v. Goldman
248 Mass. 365 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1924)
Holman v. Updike
94 N.E. 689 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1911)
Masonic Temple Safety Deposit Co. v. Langfelt
117 Ill. App. 652 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1905)
Bumpus v. Turgeon
57 A. 883 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1904)
Roehm v. Horst
91 F. 345 (Third Circuit, 1898)
Russell v. Cole
44 N.E. 1057 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1896)
Hyde v. Moxie Nerve Food Co.
36 N.E. 585 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 Mass. 441, 1882 Mass. LEXIS 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fish-v-gates-mass-1882.