Hardy v. Finger, 199 N.E.2d 533 (Mass. 1964). · Go Syfert
Hardy v. Finger, 199 N.E.2d 533 (Mass. 1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Special Olympics International, Inc. (mad, 2003-01-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Special Olympics International, Inc.
D. Mass. · 2003 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Hardy v. Finger, 347 Mass. 779, 779 , 199 N.E.2d 533, 533 (1964) (holding employer did not effectuate delivery of funds kept in bank account to housekeeper by giving bankbook to employer’s conservator despite noting on bankbooks that the funds belonged to the housekeeper, where housekeeper lacked access to the funds); Monaghan v. Monaghan, 320 Mass. 367, 369-70 , 69 N.E.2d 476, 477 (1946) (finding lack of delivery where donor gave gifted property to potential donee’s son to deliver to donee).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lucie L. Hardy
v.
Louis S. Finger & others, executors, & others
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Jun 1, 1964.
199 N.E.2d 533
Sabina V. Bush for the petitioner., Fredric S. O’Brien, Town Counsel, for the intervener, Town of Andover, W. Clifford McDonald for the respondents.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

Decree affirmed. The petitioner appeals from a decree denying her petition that she be declared the owner of funds on deposit in several banks in the name of the respondent executors’ testatrix for whom the petitioner had worked as housekeeper for several years preceding the testatrix’s death in October, 1960. The petitioner contends that the bankbooks had been given to her by the testatrix. At the time of the testatrix’s death and for four years prior thereto, the bankbooks were in the possession of the testatrix’s conservator. The judge found that, although there were notations on several of the bankbooks and jackets, some bearing the testatrix’s signature, to the effect that the books were to be considered the property of the petitioner, the testatrix in fact had never made a delivery of and had never intended a gift of the bankbooks to the petitioner. The evidence, reported under G. L. c. 215, § 18, does not show these findings, decisive of the case, to be plainly wrong. Cohan v. Reardon, 313 Mass. 471, 472. Monaghan v. Monaghan, 320 Mass. 367, 369-370. Kobrosky v. Crystal, 332 Mass. 452, 460.