Calantropio

121 N.E.2d 668, 331 Mass. 761, 1954 Mass. LEXIS 599
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided September 16, 1954·Published

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

Calantropio, 121 N.E.2d 668, 331 Mass. 761, 1954 Mass. LEXIS 599 (Mass. 1954).

121 N.E.2d 668 (Calantropio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kane v. Registrars of Voters of Fall River
105 N.E.2d 212 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1952)
Adamsky v. City Council of New Bedford
96 N.E.2d 718 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1951)
Harrington v. Anderson
55 N.E.2d 30 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1944)