Cobb v. Hale

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Cobb v. Hale

52 N.E. 520, 172 Mass. 387, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 796

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJanuary 6, 1899

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 52 N.E. 520 (Cobb v. Hale) 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

Cobb v. Hale, 52 N.E. 520, 172 Mass. 387, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 796 (Mass. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Field, C. J.

We infer from the papers before us that the action was originally brought in the Second District Court of Plymouth, where judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed to the Superior Court, and that on March 7, 1898, in the Superior Court this judgment was affirmed on complaint made by the defendant that the appeal had not been properly entered, and that the proper papers had not been filed. Pub. Sts. c. 155, § 34; c. 154, § 39. St. 1893, c. 386, § 30. The defendant on March 18, 1898, filed in the Superior Court a petition asking that the judgment be vacated, which “ upon hearing ” was dismissed on March 28,1898, and the defendant on April 4, 1898, appealed to this court. It does not appear on what ground the Superior Court dismissed the petition, nor what appeared to that court on the hearing to be the facts. There appears also an appeal by the defendant to this court from the judgment rendered in the Superior Court. There is no matter of law apparent on the record which this court can consider under either appeal. Certainly no error of law appears in the record before us.

Petition dismissed, and judgment affirmed.

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

Field, C. J.

We infer from the papers before us that the action was originally brought in the Second District Court of Plymouth, where judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed to the Superior Court, and that on March 7, 1898, in the Superior Court this judgment was affirmed on complaint made by the defendant that the appeal had not been properly entered, and that the proper papers had not been filed. Pub. Sts. c. 155, § 34; c. 154, § 39. St. 1893, c. 386, § 30. The defendant on March 18, 1898, filed in the Superior Court a petition asking that the judgment be vacated, which “ upon hearing ” was dismissed on March 28,1898, and the defendant on April 4, 1898, appealed to this court. It does not appear on what ground the Superior Court dismissed the petition, nor what appeared to that court on the hearing to be the facts. There appears also an appeal by the defendant to this court from the judgment rendered in the Superior Court. There is no matter of law apparent on the record which this court can consider under either appeal. Certainly no error of law appears in the record before us.

Petition dismissed, and judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 N.E. 520, 172 Mass. 387, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cobb-v-hale-mass-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack