Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
98 N.E. 697 (Mass. 1912)
Shaw (defendant) was the general contractor for the construction of a subway station. Shaw subcontracted with Lancaster to have Lancaster do excavating and mason work. Lancaster was low on money so Homer (plaintiff) agreed to advance Lancaster money in exchange for an assignment of half of Lancaster’s fee under the contract with Shaw. Shaw accepted the assignment. Subsequently, Lancaster told Shaw that due to his financial situation, he could not afford to pay his workers and would not be able to complete his mason work. Shaw and Lancaster then formed another contract to meet Lancaster’s financial needs. Shaw testified that this contract rescinded the original contract between Shaw and Lancaster. Homer brought suit against Shaw for half of Lancaster’s fee under the new contract. The trial court ruled in favor of Shaw. Homer appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Braley, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 238,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.