City of Springfield v. Sleeper
115 Mass. 587, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 263
Opinion
It was within the discretion of the court to order the three cases to be tried together. The difference in the evidence, and the employment of distinct counsel by the defendants, were circumstances to be considered by the court below, but did not entitle the plaintiff as of right to separate trials. Witherlee v. Ocean Ins. Co. 24 Pick. 67. Kimball v. Thompson, 4 Cush. 441. Commonwealth v. Robinson, 1 Gray, 555. Commonwealth v. James, 99 Mass. 438. Commonwealth v. Powers, 109 Mass. 353. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
City of Springfield v. Sleeper, 115 Mass. 587, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 263 (Mass. 1874).
115 Mass. 587 (City of Springfield v. Sleeper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State Ex Rel. Shaffer v. Superior Court
50 P.2d 917 (Washington Supreme Court, 1935)
Yardley v. Rutland Railroad Co.
153 A. 195 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1931)
Schmidt v. Riess
203 N.W. 362 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1925)
Burke v. Hodge
97 N.E. 920 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)
Jones v. City of Boston
83 N.E. 309 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
Priddy v. MacKenzie
103 S.W. 968 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1907)
Sullivan v. Fugazzi
79 N.E. 775 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
Field v. Lang
36 A. 984 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1897)
Grant v. Davis
31 N.E. 587 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1892)
Commonwealth v. Miller
22 N.E. 434 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1889)
Burt v. Wigglesworth
117 Mass. 302 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1875)