¶1These exceptions are frivolous. The officer’s return in the former action did not estop him to prove, and *583the court below has found the fact to be, that Rogers, the then defendant and now plaintiff, had no property in the piano. Denny v. Willard, 11 Pick. 519, 526. Roberts v. Wentworth, 5 Cush. 192. Exceptions overruled, with double costs.
123 Mass. 582
Rogers v. Cromack
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 14, 1878
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1878-01-14
Contract for $132, money had and received, with a special count for the same cause of action. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Brigham, C. J., who found the following facts: Edward De Anguera brought an action against John Rogers, the present plaintiff, in the First District Court of Eastern Middlesex, for the price of a piano alleged to have been sold and delivered by De Anguera to Rogers.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1933
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1878-01-14
View the full empirical analysis of this case →