Hodges v. Hodges

9 Mass. 320
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided October 15, 1812·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

Non constat that the defendant’s account was ever laid before the referees. If it was not, they could not arbitrate upon it. The agreement of the parties, evidenced * by the rule of the Court, was then so far not executed; and notwithstanding the general report of the referees, the defendant, if not otherwise precluded, may yet have his action upon the account filed by him, but on which the referees have not awarded. The judgment of the Common Pleas is affirmed, with costs for the defendant in error.

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

Hodges v. Hodges, 9 Mass. 320 (Mass. 1812).

9 Mass. 320 (Hodges v. Hodges) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Louison v. Fischman
168 N.E.2d 340 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1960)
Jones v. . Welwood
71 N.Y. 208 (New York Court of Appeals, 1877)
King v. Savory
62 Mass. 309 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1851)
Slocum v. Damon
1 Pin. 520 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1845)
Elliott v. Quimby
13 N.H. 181 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1842)
Page v. Foster
7 N.H. 392 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1834)
Inhabitants of North Yarmouth v. Inhabitants of Cumberland
6 Me. 21 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1829)
Livermore v. Herschell
20 Mass. 32 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1825)
Smith v. Whiting
11 Mass. 445 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1814)
Kleine v. Catara
14 F. Cas. 732 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts, 1814)
Webster v. Lee
5 Mass. 334 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1809)