Glidden v. Child

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Glidden v. Child

122 Mass. 433, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 153

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedApril 10, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 122 Mass. 433 (Glidden v. Child) 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

Glidden v. Child, 122 Mass. 433, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 153 (Mass. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The first exception cannot be sustained. The written agreement of the defendants was an original, and not a collateral promise; and the plaintiff, upon substantially performing the agreement on his part, with variations assented to by the defendants, might maintain this action on an account annexed.

The rest of the bill of exceptions was rightly disallowed by the presiding judge as not conformable to the truth. The report of the commissioner shows that, upon the question of waiver or variation of the terms of the written agreement, material evidence of the action of the inspector of buildings, and of the silence of one of the defendants when applied to for payment, was introduced at the trial, and not stated in the bill of exceptions presented to the judge.

Both parts of the case are covered by previous decisions. Cullen v. Sears, 112 Mass. 299. Arvilla v. Spaulding, 121 Mass. 505. Exceptions overruled.

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

Gray, C. J.

The first exception cannot be sustained. The written agreement of the defendants was an original, and not a collateral promise; and the plaintiff, upon substantially performing the agreement on his part, with variations assented to by the defendants, might maintain this action on an account annexed.

The rest of the bill of exceptions was rightly disallowed by the presiding judge as not conformable to the truth. The report of the commissioner shows that, upon the question of waiver or variation of the terms of the written agreement, material evidence of the action of the inspector of buildings, and of the silence of one of the defendants when applied to for payment, was introduced at the trial, and not stated in the bill of exceptions presented to the judge.

Both parts of the case are covered by previous decisions. Cullen v. Sears, 112 Mass. 299. Arvilla v. Spaulding, 121 Mass. 505. Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 Mass. 433, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glidden-v-child-mass-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack