Greenleaf v. Allen

127 Mass. 248, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 64
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided July 30, 1879·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

A promise under seal to pay rent is a covenant. The declaration is a sufficient declaration in contract in the nature of covenant, under the practice act. Gen. Sts. c. 129, § 2. The defendant is liable in this action for the breaches ■ of covenant, both before and after the death of his testator. Hovey v. Newton, 11 Pick. 421. A representation of insolvency does not prevent the prosecution of this action to judgment so an to ascertain the amount due. Gen. Sts. o. 99, § 20. Greenwood v. McGilvray, 120 Mass. 516. The instructions given were, to say the least; sufficiently favorable to the defendant. The jury, under those instructions, must have found that the plaintiffs had not, orally or in wilting, released the rent in arrear; and there was no evidence of any such representation, other than a present release, as was suggested in the defendant’s request for instructions. An assignment of the lease by the lessee could not affect the liability of the lessee or his executor upon the covenants therein. Dwight v. Mudge, 12 Gray, 23. See also Deane v. Caldwell, ante, 242. ^Exceptions overruled.

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

Greenleaf v. Allen, 127 Mass. 248, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 64 (Mass. 1879).

127 Mass. 248 (Greenleaf v. Allen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Walker v. Rednalloh Co.
13 N.E.2d 394 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1938)
S. S. Kresge Co. v. Sears
87 F.2d 135 (First Circuit, 1936)
S. S. Kresge Co. v. Sears
15 F. Supp. 522 (D. Massachusetts, 1936)
Connolly v. Rogers
197 N.E. 483 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)
Israel v. Beale
169 N.E. 777 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1930)
Carlton Chambers Co. v. Trask
158 N.E. 786 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1927)
Johnson v. Stone
102 N.E. 366 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
In re Quaker Drug Co.
204 F. 689 (W.D. Washington, 1913)
Brownfield v. Holland
114 P. 890 (Washington Supreme Court, 1911)
Dietz v. Kucks
45 P. 832 (California Supreme Court, 1896)