Stevens v. Blunt
This text of 7 Mass. 240 (Stevens v. Blunt) 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
for the defendant in error, now urged the objection which he made successfully at the Common Pleas.
But the Court held the note payable absolutely at a day certain, and they reversed the judgment of the Common Pleas, and ordered a new trial at the bar of this Court.
Story for the plaintiff in error,
.) [This decision is clearly wrong. The promisor had a right of election lo pay either at the time mentioned, or when the building should be completed, according to contract. The latter event might never take place; and, therefore, the note, at the election of the promisor, was payable on a contingency, which might, or might not, happen.—Ed.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
7 Mass. 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-blunt-mass-1810.