Hunnewell v. Cohen

106 N.E. 1045, 219 Mass. 162, 1914 Mass. LEXIS 1560
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 24, 1914
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 106 N.E. 1045 (Hunnewell v. Cohen) 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
Hunnewell v. Cohen, 106 N.E. 1045, 219 Mass. 162, 1914 Mass. LEXIS 1560 (Mass. 1914).

Opinion

Sheldon, J.

It is enough to say in this case that the contentions of the defendants Cohen and Fittingoff are without merit. They are disposed of by the findings of fact made by the judge who heard the case. Those findings present no such inconsistency with each other as to require us to reverse any of them, and we cannot see that they work any injustice to the defendants. No question of law arises.

The decree appealed from must be modified by charging Cohen and Fittingoff with additional interest for the time that has elapsed since the entry of that decree, and with the costs of the appeal, and so modified must be affirmed.

So ordered.

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

Related

Jones v. Wittenberg University
534 F.2d 1203 (Sixth Circuit, 1976)
Huntsman v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co.
81 N.E.2d 118 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
106 N.E. 1045, 219 Mass. 162, 1914 Mass. LEXIS 1560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunnewell-v-cohen-mass-1914.