Guerin v. Stacey
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
| Writing for the Court | HOLMES |
| Citation | 56 N.E. 892,175 Mass. 595 |
| Parties | GUERIN v. STACEY et al. |
| Decision Date | 28 March 1900 |
GUERIN
v.
STACEY et al.
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.
March 28, 1900.
Exceptions from superior court, Suffolk county; John A. Aiken, Judge.
Action by Fitz W. Guerin against William H. Stacey and others for damages accruing to plaintiff upon a bond. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff excepts. Exceptions sustained.
George [175 Mass. 596]F. Manson, for plaintiff.
J. W. Spaulding and R. W. Hunter, for defendants.
HOLMES, C. J.
This is an action upon a bond given by a lessee to his sublessee, and conditioned that if, through the acts of the former, his lease should be terminated, or the sublessee ousted before the expiration of the term, the obligation should remain in force, and the obligors should pay the obligee the sum of $2,500 as liquidated damages. The sum named is also the penalty of the bond. It is not expressed, but it is implied, that if the sublessee should enjoy his term undisturbed, the obligation[175 Mass. 597]should be void. The bond was dated August 17, 1894. The lease would have expired in July, 1898. It was terminated in July, 1897, and the plaintiff, finding that he would be recognized by the owner only as a monthly tenant, gave notice, and left the premises on October 22, 1897. The case is before us on a single exception taken by the plaintiff to a ruling by the judge who tried the case that the sum named in this condition was a penalty, and not liquidated damages.
There is no doubt that a sum which is to be paid upon the breach of a primary undertaking may be treated as a penalty in some cases, notwithstanding the fact that it is called ‘liquidated damages' in the contract. The typical case is where it secures several promises of varying importance, one or more of which is for the payment of a much smaller sum of money. Fisk v. Gray, 11 Allen, 132; Wallis v. Smith, 21 Ch. Div. 243, 257, 268, 275. But we heartily agree with the court of appeals in England that, so far as precedent permits, the proper course is to enforce contract according to their plain meaning, and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties, and therefore that in general, when parties say that a sum is payable as liquidated damages, they will be taken to mean what they say, and will be held to their word. Wallis v. Smith, 21 Ch. Div. 243; Atkyns v. Kinnier, 4 Exch. 776, 783. In the language of Baron Parke in the case last cited: ‘If there be a contract consisting of one or more stipulations, the breach of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. Marx, No. 96-P-0114
...permits ... to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties." Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900). Competing with that approach in an almost equal number of jurisdictions, see appendix, is that espoused by this cour......
-
Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, Inc., No. 01-1108.
...is to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties.") (quoting Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900) (Holmes, In this case, the contract unambiguously prohibits "reverse engineering." That term means ordinarily "to st......
-
Begelfer v. Najarian
...supra, 54 N.J.Super. at 213-214, 148 A.2d 634. See also Makletzova v. Diaghileff, 227 Mass. 100, 116 N.E. 231 (1917); Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900); Manhattan Syndicate, Inc. v. Ryan, 14 App.Div.2d 323, 327-328, 220 N.Y.S.2d 337 (1961). Were we to treat the default......
-
Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, Inc., No. 01-1108.
...is to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties.") (quoting Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900) (Holmes, In this case, the contract unambiguously prohibits "reverse engineering." That term means ordinarily "to st......
-
Kelly v. Marx, No. 96-P-0114
...permits ... to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties." Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900). Competing with that approach in an almost equal number of jurisdictions, see appendix, is that espoused by this cour......
-
Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, Inc., No. 01-1108.
...is to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties.") (quoting Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900) (Holmes, In this case, the contract unambiguously prohibits "reverse engineering." That term means ordinarily "to st......
-
Begelfer v. Najarian
...supra, 54 N.J.Super. at 213-214, 148 A.2d 634. See also Makletzova v. Diaghileff, 227 Mass. 100, 116 N.E. 231 (1917); Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900); Manhattan Syndicate, Inc. v. Ryan, 14 App.Div.2d 323, 327-328, 220 N.Y.S.2d 337 (1961). Were we to treat the default......
-
Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, Inc., No. 01-1108.
...is to enforce contracts according to their plain meaning and not to undertake to be wiser than the parties.") (quoting Guerin v. Stacy, 175 Mass. 595, 597, 56 N.E. 892 (1900) (Holmes, In this case, the contract unambiguously prohibits "reverse engineering." That term means ordinarily "to st......