Jackman v. Doland

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Jackman v. Doland

116 Mass. 550, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 37

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided January 9, 1875·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The first part of the answer sets up no legal defence, because it states no facts, but only what in a certain contingency may be the evidence at the trial. Suit v. Woodhall, ante, 547.

If the rest of the answer can be treated as constituting a separate allegation, it is insufficient, because it does not show any neglect on the part of the plaintiff, or lapse of reasonable time, or refusal upon demand; and because, if it did, the matters alleged would not show a want of consideration, but at most only a subject of recoupment, which is not pleaded. Hodgkins v. Moulton, 100 Mass. 309. Exceptions overruled.

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

Gray, C. J.

The first part of the answer sets up no legal defence, because it states no facts, but only what in a certain contingency may be the evidence at the trial. Suit v. Woodhall, ante, 547.

If the rest of the answer can be treated as constituting a separate allegation, it is insufficient, because it does not show any neglect on the part of the plaintiff, or lapse of reasonable time, or refusal upon demand; and because, if it did, the matters alleged would not show a want of consideration, but at most only a subject of recoupment, which is not pleaded. Hodgkins v. Moulton, 100 Mass. 309. Exceptions overruled.

Jackman v. Doland, 116 Mass. 550, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 37 (Mass. 1875).

Pincite

116 Mass. 550 (Jackman v. Doland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related