Jackman v. Doland
This text of 116 Mass. 550 (Jackman v. Doland) 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.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
116 Mass. 550, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackman-v-doland-mass-1875.