Scott v. Calkin
2 N.E. 675, 139 Mass. 529, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 142
Opinion
W. Allen, J.
The indorsement of the note by the defendant Cherrington, under the circumstances proved, imported a guaranty of the payment of the note to the plaintiff, and gave [531] him authority to write, over her name, the contract implied by law; and this, if necessary at all, could be done during the trial. Josselyn v. Ames, 3 Mass. 274. Tenney v. Prince, 4 Pick. 385.
The finding of the court renders immaterial the question whether demand and notice were necessary.
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Scott v. Calkin, 2 N.E. 675, 139 Mass. 529, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 142 (Mass. 1885).
2 N.E. 675 (Scott v. Calkin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ryan v. Spear
1 Mass. App. Div. 609 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1936)
Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance v. Boyer
294 Mass. 35 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1936)
Kahn v. Waldman
186 N.E. 587 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1933)
Goodman v. Gaull
244 Mass. 528 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1923)
Equitable Marine Insurance v. Adams
53 N.E. 883 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1899)