Hodgkinson v. Hodgkinson

Decision Date06 January 1933
Citation281 Mass. 463,183 N.E. 708
PartiesHODGKINSON v. HODGKINSON.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Superior Court, Suffolk County; F. T. Hammond, Judge.

Suit by Clara F. Hodgkinson, administratrix of the estate of John Hodgkinson, deceased, against Thomas J. Hodgkinson. From an adverse decree, complainant appeals.

Affirmed.

M. Michelson, of Boston, for appellant.

Simon E. Duffin, of Boston, for appellee.

CROSBY, J.

This bill in equity is brought by the administratrix of the estate of John Hodgkinson, seeking a partnership accounting. The case was referred to a master who made the following findings: The defendant is the son of the intestate, and in the year 1885 they entered into an oral partnership for carrying on a milling and finishing business, including the making of sashes and windows, under the name of John Hodgkinson & Son. Until 1895 the business was carried on at Business street, Hyde Park, and thereafter at 25-29 West street, a mill being erected there with partner-ship funds. Until 1919 the land and shop equipment, machinery and business were owned by the partners in equal shares. Late in 1918 and early in 1919 the father was ill and unable to work; the defendant kept the books, drew the checks and kept the accounts. There was no agreement as to the division of profits or capital upon dissolution, except that they were to share equally. In May, 1919, a verbal agreement was entered into by them by which the father retained a one-half interest in the real estate on West street, and a one-half interest in the machinery and equipment in the mill. The defendant thereafter owned the entire business of the partnership including its good will, bills receivable and cash, and assumed the bills payable. The defendant agreed to pay his father not less than $20 nor more than $35 a month if the business warranted such an increase until the survivor of his father or mother deceased. The intestate accepted the agreement of the defendant to make the payments as a complete accounting and in consideration thereof transferred to the defendant his entire interest in the partnership, retaining for himself only the interest in the real estate and equipment as above set forth. The defendant made the payments as agreed until the death of his father on May 11, 1923, and thereafter until the death of his mother which occurred June 11, 1923. After the agreement above set forth was entered into the defendant conducted the business under his individual name. At the time of the accounting the defendant also agreed to pay the taxes on the partnership real estate and equipment and to make minor repairs; this he did up to the date of the death of his father, who was mentally competent and had full knowledge of the agreement and transfer of his interest in the business to the defendant. Both parties acted in good faith. From May 1, 1919, to the death of the intestate, no accounting was ever requested of the defendant by his father or by the daughter Clara F. Hodgkinson, who is the plaintiff in this suit. In July, 1920, the intestate conveyed by deeds and bill of sale all his property, real and personal, to this daughter, except his one-half interest in the mill and equipment. The heirs of the intestate and his wife were the defendant and four daughters, three of whom were unmarried and lived away from their father's home. On June 14, 1923, these three sisters conveyed all their interest in the estates of their father and mother to the plaintiff. On June 15, 1923, the plaintiff agreed to accept the sum of $1,700 from the defendant for her interest in the real estate and equipment of the mill, she then being the owner of four tenths thereof. Accordingly, on the following day she executed and delivered to the defendant a deed and a release conveying to the defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Patrick v. Dunbar
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1937
    ...516, 77 N.E. 481;Hooker v. Porter, 271 Mass. 441, 446, 171 N.E. 713;Cook v. Howe, 280 Mass. 325, 328, 182 N.E. 581;Hodgkinson v. Hodgkinson, 281 Mass. 463, 466, 183 N.E. 708. The mere fact that the estate had been represented insolvent is not enough to give the executor an interest in the r......
  • Sullivan v. Sullivan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • January 10, 1957
    ...for the real estate is not appropriately an integral part of this probate account. See G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 206, § 6; Hodgkinson v. Hodgkinson, 281 Mass. 463, 466, 183 N.E. 708. However, in view of the close relationship of the normal probate accounting to the accounting under the resulting tr......
  • Roper v. Murphy
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • October 25, 1944
    ... ... the real estate which she could convey effectively ... Hooker v. Porter, 271 Mass. 441 , 446. Cook v ... Howe, 280 Mass. 325 , 328. Hodgkinson v ... Hodgkinson, 281 Mass. 463 , 466. Patrick v ... Dunbar, 297 Mass. 40 , 43. Moran v. Manning, ... 306 Mass. 404 , 409. Nunes v. Rogers, 307 ... ...
  • Roper v. Murphy
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • October 25, 1944
    ...effectively. Hooker v. Porter, 271 Mass. 441, 446, 171 N.E. 713;Cook v. Howe, 280 Mass. 325, 328, 182 N.E. 581;Hodgkinson v. Hodgkinson, 281 Mass. 463, 466, 183 N.E. 708;Patrick v. Dunbar, 297 Mass. 40, 43, 7 N.E.2d 439;Moran v. Manning, 306 Mass. 404, 409, 28 N.E.2d 478;Nunes v. Rogers, 30......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT