Linton v. Hurley

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Linton v. Hurley

104 Mass. 353

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1870

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 104 Mass. 353 (Linton v. Hurley) 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

Linton v. Hurley, 104 Mass. 353 (Mass. 1870).

Pincite

Opinion

Chapman, C. J.

On the 10th of June 1858 the plaintiff had a claim against the defendants for damages for a personal injury, and had commenced an action of tort to recover damages therefor, which action was then pending, and judgment was not ren[354]*354dered in his favor till October term 1859. On the day first mentioned he assigned his claim to Moses G. Cobb. He contends that this assignment was void, and this position is sustained by the case of Rice v. Stone, 1 Allen, 566. The ruling that it was valid was erroneous. Exceptions sustained.

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

Chapman, C. J.

On the 10th of June 1858 the plaintiff had a claim against the defendants for damages for a personal injury, and had commenced an action of tort to recover damages therefor, which action was then pending, and judgment was not ren[354]*354dered in his favor till October term 1859. On the day first mentioned he assigned his claim to Moses G. Cobb. He contends that this assignment was void, and this position is sustained by the case of Rice v. Stone, 1 Allen, 566. The ruling that it was valid was erroneous. Exceptions sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 Mass. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linton-v-hurley-mass-1870.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack