Seamless Rubber Co. v. Reed
This text of 122 N.E. 407 (Seamless Rubber Co. v. Reed) 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
This is an action of contract upon an account annexed. The goods were charged to the Reed Auto Supply Company, a designation under which the defendant formerly did business. The defence was that the defendant before the delivery of the goods in question had transferred his business by bill of sale to one Derry, who thereafter had filed a certificate in conformity to St. 1907, c. 539, that he was conducting the business under 'the name of Reed Auto Supply. It appeared that Derry was a minor. There was evidence that Reed continued to work at the place of business after the bill of sale. It was open to the jury to find that [456]*456the transactions with and by Derry were a sham, and that Reed was in fact conducting the business. Hence there was no error in denying the motion for a directed verdict and all the requests for rulings.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
122 N.E. 407, 232 Mass. 454, 1919 Mass. LEXIS 822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seamless-rubber-co-v-reed-mass-1919.