Commonwealth v. Parmenter

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Parmenter

22 Mass. 279

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1827

StatusPublished

This text of 22 Mass. 279 (Commonwealth v. Parmenter) 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. Parmenter, 22 Mass. 279 (Mass. 1827).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

As the indictment sets out the note accord"ng to its purport and effect, and not according to its tenor, we think the variance is not material. I promised would be construed to mean I promise ¹

But it was not sufficiently proved that the offence was committed in the county of Worcester. The evidence was only that the note was here uttered. It is clear from authority, that the offence of forging in the county cannot be inferred from the fact of uttering and publishing in the county.²

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

Per Curiam.

As the indictment sets out the note accord"ng to its purport and effect, and not according to its tenor, we think the variance is not material. I promised would be construed to mean I promise ¹

But it was not sufficiently proved that the offence was committed in the county of Worcester. The evidence was only that the note was here uttered. It is clear from authority, that the offence of forging in the county cannot be inferred from the fact of uttering and publishing in the county.²

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 Mass. 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-parmenter-mass-1827.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack