Cali v. Caliri
| Decision Date | 27 January 1926 |
| Citation | 254 Mass. 488,150 N.E. 323 |
| Parties | CALI et al. v. CALIRI et al. CALIRI et al. v. CALI et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeals from Superior Court, Essex County.
Suits in equity by Antonio Cali and others against Vincenzo Caliri and others and by Vincenzo Caliri and others against Antonio Cali and others for accounting of the affairs of a partnership. Cases consolidated and referred to a master, who made a single report. From a final decree entered on the master's report, appeals were taken. Decree modified and amended, and, as amended and modified, affirmed.
J. C. Campopiano, of Lawrence, for defendants.
[1] These are suits in equity for an accounting among its members of the affairs of a partnership, which has been terminated. The partnership bought grapes by the carload and sold them in smaller quantities. The members of the firm most actively engaged in its business were not able to read and write to any extent and could not and did not keep books of account. The cases were referred to a master who made a single report covering both suits. The cases also were consolidated and a single final decree entered. This was correct practice because both related to a single matter namely, the true state of partnership accounts. Lumiansky v. Tessier, 213 Mass. 182, 189, 99 N. E. 1051, Ann. Cas. 1913E, 1049.
[2] The master's report shows that a son of one of the partners testified that he worked for the firm on certain days in the absence of his father; that Vincenzo Caliri one of the other partners gave him a book in which to keep the partnership record of sales; that he kept ‘on the sly’ in the back of this book, which was destroyed more than a year before the hearings, a record of the goods taken for or by Vincenzo Caliri and telephoned the record so kept to his sister, who wrote the information thus conveyed on a paper. This paper was offered as an account of the partnership, as a memorandum by the salesman, or for any other competent purpose. The salesman was allowed to use this paper to refresh his recollection, but it was not admitted in evidence. The contention that it was competent as a book account cannot be supported. It was not a system of book accounts. It was not kept in such way and under circumstances to require an inference of authenticity and accuracy. Its exclusion rests upon the principle of several adjudications. Riley v. Boehm, 167 Mass. 183, 45 N. E. 84;Kaplan v. Gross, 223 Mass....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ryan v. Stavros
...overruled the plaintiffs' exceptions, impliedly denied their motion to recommit, and impliedly confirmed the report. See Cali v. Caliri, 254 Mass. 488, 490, 150 N.E. 323; Courtney v. Charles Dowd Box Co. Inc., supra, 341 Mass. 340, 169 N.E.2d 885. Whether the master's ultimate findings are ......
-
Di Angeles v. Scauzillo
...belong to the plaintiff. It does not appear to have been furnished by him or to be a part of his system of accounts. See Cali v. Caliri, 254 Mass. 488, 150 N. E. 323. Nor does it appear that the book was kept by the defendant by the express or implied direction of the plaintiff or was essen......
-
Simpson v. Bright
...Loom Co., v. Wilson, 198 Mass. 182, 200, 84 N. E. 133,126 Am. St. Rep. 409;Fuller v. Fuller, 228 Mass. 441, 117 N. E. 838;Cali v. Caliri (Mass.) 150 N. E. 323;G. L. c. 231, § 124. So treated the exceptions numbered 4, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 are based upon objections taken to the rulings of th......
- Zussman v. Goldberg