Blaisdell v. Bickum

1 N.E. 281, 139 Mass. 250, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 76
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 8, 1885·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

W. Allen, J.

The court properly ruled that, if Rowena Mack was the daughter of the plaintiff’s mother’s sister, the marriage between her and the plaintiff was null and void. It was made so by the statute of New Hampshire, where the marriage was contracted.

The evidence offered to prove the death of Quimby should have been excluded. It was evidence of a report in the community, not shown to have been accepted by, or known to, the family of Quimby, of the place and manner of his recent death This does not come within any exception which allows declarations of deceased members of a family, or reputation in the family, to be received as evidence of facts relating to pedigree, but under the general rule that hearsay evidence and common rumor are incompetent to prove particular facts.

Exceptions sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Blaisdell v. Bickum, 1 N.E. 281, 139 Mass. 250, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 76 (Mass. 1885).

1 N.E. 281 (Blaisdell v. Bickum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Dutney
348 N.E.2d 812 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1976)
Rhodes v. Rhodes
96 F.2d 715 (D.C. Circuit, 1938)
Lariviere v. Lariviere
147 A. 700 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1929)
Root v. MacDonald
157 N.E. 684 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1927)
Arado v. Arado
117 N.E. 816 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1917)
Kapigian v. Der Minassian
99 N.E. 264 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. King
181 F. 913 (Ninth Circuit, 1910)
Welch v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
64 N.E. 695 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
In re Hurlburt's Estate
68 Vt. 366 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1895)
Hayes v. Rollins
44 A. 176 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1894)
Williams v. State
12 S.E. 743 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)