Sherman v. Proprietors of Connecticut River Bridge
This text of 11 Mass. 338 (Sherman v. Proprietors of Connecticut River Bridge) 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 first corporation was dead, and the new one was created for the same purpose and object. The writ was served on the clerk of the existing corporation, by which regular notice was given the real proprietors of the bridge. This is, then, the common case of a misnomer. The amendment may be made, on the common rule of an election by the defendants of the costs of the action to this time, or a continuance,
Burnham vs. Savings Bank, 5 N. H. R. 573. — 1 Chitty, 282, 486, 5th ed.—1 B. & P. 40 —3 Anst. 935.—3 Camp. 29. —16 East, 110.—6 M. & S. 45.—10 Mass. Rep. 203. — Denny & Al. vs. Ward, 3 Pick. 199. — Bullard vs. Nantucket Bank, 25 Mass. Rep. 99.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 Mass. 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherman-v-proprietors-of-connecticut-river-bridge-mass-1814.