Goddard v. Rawson

130 Mass. 97, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 12
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJanuary 10, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 130 Mass. 97 (Goddard v. Rawson) 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
Goddard v. Rawson, 130 Mass. 97, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 12 (Mass. 1881).

Opinion

Soule, J.

The sale of coal, and the weighing of coal for another at a fixed price per load, are both legal transactions at common law. One entitles the seller to recover the value or agreed price of the article sold, while the other entitles him who renders the sent ice to the compensation stipulated for. The St. of 1870, c. 205, makes it unlawful to sell coal except by the cargo, which has not been weighed by a duly appointed and sworn weigher. The sales by the plaintiff to the defendant were therefore unlawful, if the plaintiff’s son who weighed the [99]*99coal was not a sworn weigher; and the service of weighing coal for the defendant was unlawfully rendered, if not rendered by a sworn weigher.

But, as the transactions on which the plaintiff’s action is founded were lawful at common law, he made a prima facie case without proving that the weighing was done in accordance with the requirements of the statute. In order to establish a defence on the ground that the transactions were illegal, it was incumbent on the defendant to prove the illegality. Timson v. Moulton, 3 Cush. 269. Wilson v. Melvin, 13 Gray, 73. Trott v. Irish, 1 Allen, 481. Brigham v. Potter, 14 Gray, 522. Pratt v. Langdon, 97 Mass. 97. Jones v. McLeod, 103 Mass. 58.

The evidence introduced at the trial may not have been sufficient or competent to establish the proposition that the son of the plaintiff was a duly appointed weigher, but it had no tendency to show that he was not such weigher. Every fact testified to was consistent with an appointment by the selectmen.

The result is, that the plaintiff is entitled to recover for the coal sold, and for the services in weighing the defendant’s coal. The verdict must be set aside, and judgment entered for the plaintiff for $31.25, and interest after the date of the writ, as provided in the report.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

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

Related

Moroni v. Brawders
57 N.E.2d 14 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1944)
Ryan v. DiPaolo
47 N.E.2d 941 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1943)
Whittingslow v. Thomas
129 N.E. 386 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1921)
Lyons v. Jordan
102 A. 976 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1918)
Conroy v. Mather
104 N.E. 487 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
O'Brien v. Shea
95 N.E. 99 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1911)
Doherty v. Inhabitants of Ayer
83 N.E. 677 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
130 Mass. 97, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goddard-v-rawson-mass-1881.