Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Providence Brewing Co. v. Maxwell

222 Mass. 123 (Mass. 1915)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Providence Brewing Co. v. Maxwell

2 Citing cases

  1. O'Connell v. Worcester

    114 N.E. 201 (Mass. 1916)   Cited 12 times
    In O'Connell v. Worcester (225 Mass. 159), the Courtneys, copartners, on March 27, 1914, applied to defendant for a liquor license and deposited with it a check in the sum of $1,000 payable to the order of the City Treasurer and signed by claimant.

    The judge was warranted in finding that the money deposited with the city treasurer was the property of the claimant. Providence Brewing Co. v. Maxwell, 222 Mass. 123. An assignment is not the less an assignment of a present indebtedness even if it is qualified by some condition, contingency or limitation depending upon the happening of a future event. Gibson v. Cooke, 20 Pick. 15. Parkhurst v. Dickerson, 21 Pick. 307. Bourne v. Cabot, 3 Met. 305. Tripp v. Brownell, ubi supra.

  2. Yereshefsky v. State of New York

    180 Misc. 191 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 1943)   Cited 4 times

    Two Massachusetts cases are peculiarly applicable to the facts here developed. In Providence Brewing Co. v. Maxwell ( 222 Mass. 123), Maxwell applied to the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Clinton for a liquor license. The rule of the Board required that a certified check, payable to the Treasurer of the town in the sum of $1,000, should accompany all applications.