Leatherbee v. Bernier
This text of 65 N.E. 842 (Leatherbee v. Bernier) 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 letters relied on do not show that the parties ever agreed on the terms of the alleged contract of sale. They are therefore not a sufficient memorandum to take the case out of the statute of frauds.
Exhibit B, while purporting to accept an offer, is not responsive to Exhibit A, and apparently refers to some other offer than the conditional one contained in Exhibit A. Exhibit C refers neither to Exhibit B nor Exhibit Á, and apparently refers to another oral communication. Oakman v. Rogers, 120 Mass. 214.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
65 N.E. 842, 182 Mass. 507, 1903 Mass. LEXIS 901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leatherbee-v-bernier-mass-1903.