Commonwealth v. McCarty

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. McCarty

6 N.E. 102, 141 Mass. 420, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 222

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedApril 1, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 6 N.E. 102 (Commonwealth v. McCarty) 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

Commonwealth v. McCarty, 6 N.E. 102, 141 Mass. 420, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 222 (Mass. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Holmes, J.

The burden was on the defendant to prove a license to the actual keeper, if he justified under it. Pub. Sts. c. 214, § 12. Commonwealth v. Belou, 115 Mass. 139. Hence he cannot have been prejudiced in any way by the failure of the complaint to deny it; and, although it should be conceded that the technical rules of pleading are not affected by the statute as to the burden of proof, that the absence of a license to the actual keeper entered into the description of the offence, and that the first request for a ruling was in effect a motion to quash, still under the circumstances we think the defect in the complaint must be regarded as formal, and that the motion came too late.

We do not decide whether the defendant was required by the statute to obtain a license, because, until the defendant had introduced some evidence that the actual keeper had a license, the question did not require to be dealt with.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Holmes, J.

The burden was on the defendant to prove a license to the actual keeper, if he justified under it. Pub. Sts. c. 214, § 12. Commonwealth v. Belou, 115 Mass. 139. Hence he cannot have been prejudiced in any way by the failure of the complaint to deny it; and, although it should be conceded that the technical rules of pleading are not affected by the statute as to the burden of proof, that the absence of a license to the actual keeper entered into the description of the offence, and that the first request for a ruling was in effect a motion to quash, still under the circumstances we think the defect in the complaint must be regarded as formal, and that the motion came too late.

We do not decide whether the defendant was required by the statute to obtain a license, because, until the defendant had introduced some evidence that the actual keeper had a license, the question did not require to be dealt with.

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 N.E. 102, 141 Mass. 420, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-mccarty-mass-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack