Calantropio
This text of 121 N.E.2d 668 (Calantropio) 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
Appeal dismissed. This is a petition in the Superior Court for a writ of habeas corpus. The writ was denied and the petitioner appealed. We assume that there may be an appeal to this court in habeas corpus proceedings under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 231, § 96. See Adamsky v. City Council of New Bedford, 326 Mass. 706. But the only part of that section which could possibly apply here is the provision permitting an appeal from an “order decisive of the case founded upon matter of law apparent on the record.” The appeal here is from the “findings and rulings” of the judge. Even if we treat this as an appeal from an “order decisive of the case” the order is not “founded upon matter of law apparent on the record.” All that is contained in the purported record here are the pleadings, requests for rulings, and the findings and rulings of the judge. It is settled that requests, findings and rulings are no part of the “record” as that word is used in § 96. Harrington v. Anderson, 316 Mass. 187, 191-192. Kane v. Registrars of Voters of Fall River, 328 Mass. 511, 513, and cases cited. It follows that the case is not properly here.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
121 N.E.2d 668, 331 Mass. 761, 1954 Mass. LEXIS 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calantropio-mass-1954.