Commonwealth v. Morrison

134 Mass. 189, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 257
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJanuary 26, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 134 Mass. 189 (Commonwealth v. Morrison) 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. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 257 (Mass. 1883).

Opinion

Colburn, J.

The only exception upon which the defendant relies, as the case is presented to us upon her brief, is to the overruling of the third, fourth and fifth grounds, or reasons, stated in her motion for a new trial. No authority is cited except the Pub. Sts. c. 153, § 8.

These reasons for a new trial relate entirely to rulings, or omissions to rule, during the progress of the trial and before verdict, to which the defendant had full opportunity to except, if she saw fit, but omitted to do so; and her motion for a new trial was addressed to the discretion of the court, and to the exercise of that discretion she has no ground of exception. Lowell Gas Light Co. v. Bean, 1 Allen, 274. Kidney v. Richards, 10 Allen, 419. Phillips v. Soule, 6 Allen, 150. Whittaker v. West Boylston, 97 Mass. 273. McAllister v. Burrill, 98 Mass. 334. Behan v. Williams, 123 Mass. 366.

There are cases of motions for new trials, based upon something which has occurred since the trial, or which was not known until after the trial, which raise questions of law, to the rulings upon which exceptions will lie, and it is to such cases that the statute upon which the defendant relies relates. Lowell Gas Light Co. v. Bean, ubi supra. Woodward v. Leavitt, 107 Mass. 453, 460. Commonwealth v. Tobin, 125 Mass. 203. Munde v. Lambie, 125 Mass. 367. Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Grace
381 N.E.2d 139 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1978)
Commonwealth v. McLaughlin
303 N.E.2d 338 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1973)
Commonwealth v. Doyle
84 N.E.2d 20 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1949)
Peterson v. Hopson
29 N.E.2d 140 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1940)
Commonwealth v. Vallarelli
173 N.E. 582 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1930)
Commonwealth v. Cero
162 N.E. 349 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1928)
Commonwealth v. Devereaux
153 N.E. 881 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1926)
Commonwealth v. Clifford
254 Mass. 390 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1926)
Commonwealth v. Haddad
145 N.E. 561 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1924)
Commonwealth v. Goldsmith
143 N.E. 812 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1924)
Commonwealth v. Dascalakis
246 Mass. 12 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1923)
Ryan v. Hickey
132 N.E. 718 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1921)
Commonwealth v. Peach
132 N.E. 351 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1921)
Crowdis v. Hayward
233 Mass. 377 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1919)
Murray v. Liebmann
120 N.E. 79 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1918)
Commonwealth v. Borasky
101 N.E. 377 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
Loveland v. Rand
85 N.E. 948 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1908)
Shanahan v. Boston & Northern Street Railway Co.
79 N.E. 751 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
Territory of Hawaii ex rel. Holloway v. Cotton
17 Haw. 374 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1906)
Goodrum v. Grimes
69 N.E. 1053 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 Mass. 189, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-morrison-mass-1883.