Henry H. Tuttle Co v. Phipps
Henry H. Tuttle Co v. Phipps
219 Mass. 474; 107 N.E. 354; 1914 Mass. LEXIS 1575
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- Weirick v. Hamm Realty Co. (Minn. 1929)
- Clarke v. Ames (Mass. 1929)
- R. H. Macy & Co. v. City of Fall River (Mass. 1949)
- McLeod v. I. J. Fox, Inc. (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1939)
- American Sandpaper Co. v. Waltham Factories, Inc. (Mass. 1938)
- J. W. Grady Co. v. Herrick (Mass. 1934)
- Arling v. Zeitz (Ill. App. Ct. 1933)
- Kirshenbaum v. General Outdoor Advertising Co. (N.Y. 1932)
- Singer v. Farquharson Confectionery Co. (Mass. 1930)
- Oscar Ruff Drug Co. v. Western Iowa Co. (Iowa 1921)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This case is concluded by the decision in Fera v. Child, 115 Mass. 32. No distinction should be made between the agreement in the lease in that case and that in the lease in the case at bar. That decision should not be overruled. The distinction between Fera v. Child, ubi supra, and Smith v. Faxon, 156 Mass. 589, is fully explained in the latter case.
Judgment for the defendant.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.