Cains v. Tirrell

112 Mass. 22
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 112 Mass. 22 (Cains v. Tirrell) 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.

Bluebook
Cains v. Tirrell, 112 Mass. 22 (Mass. 1873).

Opinion

Gray, J.

There was a mistrial of this case. A declaration in set-off having been filed, the plaintiffs could not discontinue without the consent of the defendant. Gen. Sts. e. 130, § 21. If the defendant had not consented to it, there was no valid discontinuance, and the plaintiffs were entitled to proceed on all the counts of their declaration. If the defendant had consented to a discontinuance of the plaintiffs’ counts in contract, he should not have been permitted to introduce evidence of his set-off. It was for the judge before whom the action was tried to determine whether there had or had not been a valid discontinuance. But the rulings at the trial allowed the defendant to affirm the discontinuance so far as it restricted the claim of the plaintiffs, and to re ■ pudiate it so far as it affected his own.

Exceptions sustained.

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

Related

Dwarska v. Ortega
13 Mass. App. Div. 159 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1948)
Lane v. Volunteer Co-operative Bank
30 N.E.2d 821 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 Mass. 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cains-v-tirrell-mass-1873.