Wood v. Washburn
This text of 19 Mass. 24 (Wood v. Washburn) 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
M. Morton,
in support of the demurrer, contended that it was not a good plea for the defendants, to say that some other person did not execute the bond ; and that if the bond had any validity, it was as a probate bond. The bond recites that the administratrix is bound, and the defendants are estopped by their deed from denying it. Jac. Law. Dict. Estoppel; Hosier v. Searle, 2 Bos. & Pul. 299 ; Co. Lit. 352 ; Willoughby v. Brook, Cro. Eliz. 756 ; Strowd v. Willes, ibid. 362 ; Shelley v. Wright, Willes, 9 ; Bac. Abr. Pleas &c., I 11 ; 1 Saund. 216, n. 2; ibid. 326, n. 4 ; Kemp v. Goodal, 1 Salk. 277 ; S. C. 2 Ld. Raym. 1154 Palmer v. Ekins, ibid. 1550 ; Adams v. Barnes, 17 Mass. R. 365 ; 10 Vin. Abr. 468.
Eddy, contra, relied on the case of Bean v. Parker, 17 Mass. R. 591, where it was held that a bail bond not signed by the principal named in it was void.
At May term 1824, at Plymouth, the third and fourth pleas were adjudged good.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 Mass. 24, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-washburn-mass-1823.