Clay v. Barlow
This text of 123 Mass. 378 (Clay v. Barlow) 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
The words “debt or damages demanded,” in the St. of 1875, e. 106, § 1, regulating the jurisdiction of the municipal courts of Boston, as in other statutes of the Commonwealth, defining the jurisdiction of courts by like words, refer to the ad damnum in the writ, and not to the amount claimed in the declaration or proved at the trial. Chamberlain v. Cochran, 8 Pick. 522. Hapgood v. Doherty, 8 Gray, 373. Trees v. Rushworth, 9 Gray, 47. Ladd v. Kimball, 12 Gray, 139. Ashuelot Bank v. Pearson, 14 Gray, 521.
The other objection, so far as it relates to the writ, was for a defect of form in process, upon which the decision of the court below was final; and, so far as it relates to the declaration, [380]*380could not be taken otherwise than by demurrer. Gen. Sta. & 114, § 10; e. 115, §7 e. 129, § 2, el. 5; §§ 7, 12. Barlow v. Leavitt, 12 Cush. 483. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
123 Mass. 378, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-v-barlow-mass-1877.