Commonwealth v. Bentley

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Bentley

216 N.E.2d 455, 350 Mass. 784

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 2, 1966·Published

Opinion

The paper entitled “bill of exceptions” does not properly present any questions of law for our consideration, and is an imposition on the court. The judge below was aware of its shortcomings, because he signed it with the statement, “treating the same as a bill of exceptions, it is hereby allowed.” The so called “bill of exceptions” is a confused collection of motions and a jumble of other material from which we are apparently expected to extract the points relied upon, restate them in legal phraseology, and decide^ them in an intelligible judicial opinion. Even if possible of accomplishment, this is something we should not be required to do. As a serious court of law, we have no choice but to dismiss the exceptions.

Exceptions dismissed.

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

The paper entitled “bill of exceptions” does not properly present any questions of law for our consideration, and is an imposition on the court. The judge below was aware of its shortcomings, because he signed it with the statement, “treating the same as a bill of exceptions, it is hereby allowed.” The so called “bill of exceptions” is a confused collection of motions and a jumble of other material from which we are apparently expected to extract the points relied upon, restate them in legal phraseology, and decide^ them in an intelligible judicial opinion. Even if possible of accomplishment, this is something we should not be required to do. As a serious court of law, we have no choice but to dismiss the exceptions.

Exceptions dismissed.

Commonwealth v. Bentley, 216 N.E.2d 455, 350 Mass. 784 (Mass. 1966).

Pincite

216 N.E.2d 455 (Commonwealth v. Bentley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.