Loring v. City of Boston
Massachusetts Supreme Court
48 Mass. 409 (1844)
On May 27, 1837, the City of Boston (city) (defendant) advertised a $1,000 reward for anyone that caught and convicted a person setting fire to a building within the city. The reward was in response to a number of fires that had recently been set in the city. The ad ran in the papers for a week. In January of 1841, Loring (plaintiff) apprehended a man suspected of starting a fire. The man was convicted in March of 1841. Following the conviction, Loring sued the city seeking the $1,000 reward. The city argued that the offer was made in an emergency situation almost four years prior to Loring’s performance of its terms and should not be considered a continuing offer.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Shaw, C.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 705,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead 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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 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.