Barnard v. Stevens
This text of 52 Mass. 297 (Barnard v. Stevens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We cannot perceive that the auditor exceeded his authority. The reference was under the Rev. Sts. c. 96, § 25. This authority was, “ to hear the parties, examine their vouchers and evidence, and to state the accounts.” When there are mutual claims, and, amongst others, a note or notes, on either or both sides, it seems to be within the scope of an auditor’s authority, and one of the purposes for which he is appointed, to take cognizance of such items, and of the notes, as vouchers, and allow or disallow them, according to his views of the proofs, and state the result in his report. It is prima facie evidence only, and if there is any good defence to the notes, it is fully open on the trial.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
52 Mass. 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnard-v-stevens-mass-1846.