Whiting v. Hollister
This text of 2 Mass. 102 (Whiting v. Hollister) 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
denied the motion, because this provision was made for the security of the defendant, which, if he pleased, he might waive; and if, at the term the writ is returned, he does not except to the want of an endorser, either by a plea in abatement, or perhaps by moving the Court to nonsuit the plaintiff, he must be considered as having waived the security provided for his benefit.
Gilbert & Al. vs. The Nantucket Bank, 5 Mass. Rep. 97.—Martin vs. Commonwealth, 1 Mass. Rep. 347.— Coffin vs. Jones, 5 Pick. 61.— Rathbone vs. Rathbone, 4 Pick. 89.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Mass. 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whiting-v-hollister-mass-1806.