Skip to content

Goodfellow v. Farnham

Aubrey Z. Goodfellow, administrator v. Lambert H. Farnham & another

Goodfellow v. Farnham, 128 N.E. 776 (Mass. 1920)

Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided: November 23, 1920
Judges: Braley
Citations: 128 N.E. 776236 Mass. 4531920 Mass. LEXIS 871

Cited by 7

Headnotes

Bills and Notes, What constitutes. Pleading, Civil, Declaration. The following instrument is a negotiable promissory note: “On demand after date I promise to pay to the order of Ann Maria Sprague One thousand Dollars with interest at 8% per annum. In case of Mrs. Sprague’s decease, the principal to be kept as a fund for the Baptist Society at Westminster, Mass., interest to go to Theodosia Miles Whitman; and in case of her decease, interest to go to said Baptist Society.” The following instrument is a negotiable promissory note: “On demand after date I promise to pay to the order of Ann Maria Sprague Four hundred Dollars with interest at 8% per annum. In case of Mrs. Sprague’s decease, the principal to be kept as a fund for the Baptist Society at Westminster, Mass., interest to go to Theodosia Miles Whitman; and in case of her decease, interest to go to said Baptist Society.” A declaration in an action by the administrator of the estate of the payee named in the foregoing instruments against the makers need not set forth any consideration for the promises therein contained.

Summary

Contract, with a declaration in two counts, each upon an instrument alleged to be “a promissory note, payable to the plaintiff’s intestate or order,” the instruments being described in the opinion. Writ dated March 19, 1919. The defendants demurred. The demurrers were heard by Hammond, J., and were sustained. Judgment was entered for the defendants; and the plaintiff appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Braley

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Braley, J.

The material parts of the instruments declared on read as follows: “On demand after date I promise to pay to the order of Ann Maria Sprague One thousand Dollars with interest at 8% per annum. In case of Mrs. Sprague’s decease, the principal to be kept as a fund for the Baptist Society at Westminster, Mass., interest to go to Theodosia Miles Whitman; and in case of her *454 decease, interest to go to said Baptist Society.” “On demand after date I promise to pay to the order of Ann Maria Sprague Four hundred Dollars with interest at 8% per annum. In case of Mrs. Sprague’s decease, the principal to be kept as a fund for the Baptist Society at Westminster, Mass., interest to go to Theodosia Miles Whitman; and in case of her decease, interest to go to said Baptist Society.”

The defendants’ demurrer having been sustained and judgment ordered in their favor, the question for decision on the plaintiff’s appeal is, whether the instruments are negotiable promissory notes. If they are, it is immaterial that no value is expressly stated. R. L. c. 73, § 23. The promise in each instrument to pay to the order of the payee is absolute and she could by indorsement in her lifetime have transferred title, and the indorsee could have demanded and enforced payment. The words following do not create any contingency postponing payment, or impose any limitation on or modification of the defendants’ promise to pay to her absolutely and at all events. It is plain that this is the only express contract between the intestate and the makers, and being unconditional the defence of non-negotiability cannot prevail. R. L. c. 73, § 18. Cherry v. Sprague, 187 Mass. 113 . National Bank of Newbury v. Wentworth, 218 Mass. 30, 32 . The judgment accordingly must be reversed and the demurrer overruled.

So ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Goodfellow v. Farnham132 N.E. 363 (Mass. 1921)
Central National Bank v. Hubbel154 N.E. 551 (Mass. 1927)
City National Bank v. Adams266 Mass. 239 (1929)
Pierce, Butler & Pierce Manufacturing Corp. v. Daniel Russell Boiler Works, Inc.159 N.E. 625 (Mass. 1928)
Parker v. Roberts137 N.E. 295 (Mass. 1922)
Star Brewing Co. v. Higgins248 Mass. 480 (1924)

Most recent

Sager Electrical Supply Co. v. Bragdon Hardware Co.5 Mass. App. Div. 255 (1940)
City National Bank v. Adams266 Mass. 239 (1929)
Pierce, Butler & Pierce Manufacturing Corp. v. Daniel Russell Boiler Works, Inc.159 N.E. 625 (Mass. 1928)
Central National Bank v. Hubbel154 N.E. 551 (Mass. 1927)
Star Brewing Co. v. Higgins248 Mass. 480 (1924)
Parker v. Roberts137 N.E. 295 (Mass. 1922)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Nat'l Bank of Newbury v. Wentworth, 105 N.E. 626 (Mass. 1914)	29
	Cherry v. Sprague, 187 Mass. 113 (1901)	27