Minot v. Curtis

7 Mass. 441
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 15, 1811
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 7 Mass. 441 (Minot v. Curtis) 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
Minot v. Curtis, 7 Mass. 441 (Mass. 1811).

Opinion

By the Court.

We are all of opinion that the creating a poll parish is as much within the intention of the legislature in the statute referred to, as the erecting of a parish circumscribed by one continuous line, and in which all the lands shall join and be contiguous to each other. As to the fact of this parish having used several names in its public proceedings, we know not why corporations may not be known by several names, as well as individuals. If this point had been before the jury as a question of fact, the defendants would have been held to prove the identity of the parish thus acting under different names. But in the case at bar, that identity is agreed. The defendants are then entitled to judgment.

Plaintiff nonsuit.

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

Related

Coken Co., Inc. v. Department of Public Works
402 N.E.2d 1110 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1980)
Secretary of the Commonwealth v. City Clerk of Lowell
366 N.E.2d 717 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1977)
In Re Reben
342 A.2d 688 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1975)
Central Finance Corp. v. Angelico
11 Mass. App. Dec. 72 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1955)
Lord v. Cummings
22 N.E.2d 26 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1939)
William Gilligan Co. v. Casey
91 N.E. 124 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1910)
First Congregational Parish of West Boylston v. Inhabitants of West Boylston
1 Davis. L. Ct. Cas. 282 (Massachusetts Land Court, 1907)
El Capitan Land & Cattle Co. v. Lees
86 P. 924 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1906)
Sykes v. People
23 N.E. 391 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
Goodyear Rubber Co. v. Goodyear's Rubber Mfg. Co.
21 F. 276 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1884)
Gifford v. Rockett
121 Mass. 431 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1877)
Farnsworth Co. v. Rand
65 Me. 19 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1876)
Lefevre v. . Lefevre
59 N.Y. 434 (New York Court of Appeals, 1875)
Hale v. Everett
53 N.H. 9 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1868)
Town of New Market v. Smart
45 N.H. 87 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1863)
Town of Montpelier v. Town of East Montpelier
29 Vt. 12 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1856)
Melledge v. Boston Iron Co.
59 Allen 158 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1849)
Inhabitants of the First Parish in Winthrop v. Inhabitants of Winthrop
1 Me. 208 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1821)
Jewett v. Burroughs
15 Mass. 463 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1819)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 Mass. 441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minot-v-curtis-mass-1811.