Cooney v. Burt

123 Mass. 579, 1878 Mass. LEXIS 204
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided January 10, 1878·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The question presented does not depend upon the rules which govern the computation of time when the last of a certain number of days allowed by statute or by general rule of court happens to fall on a Sunday or other legal holiday; but upon the construction of the special order made by the judge in this case, which did not define the time by the number of days, but by a particular date, and, as stated in his certificate, was that “ the time for filing and presentment of these exceptions was extended by the court to April 12,” and clearly did not allow them to be presented to him after that day. The plaintiff, having taken the objection before the allowance of the exceptions, has the right to insist that they were not presented to tne judge, as well as filed with the clerk, within the time limited [580]*580by the judge’s order. Gen. Sts. c. 115, § 7. Doherty v. Lincoln, 114 Mass. 362. Commonwealth v. Greenlaw, 119 Mass. 208. Conway v. Callahan, 121 Mass. 165. Walker v. Moors, 122 Mass. 501. Exceptions dismissed.

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

Cooney v. Burt, 123 Mass. 579, 1878 Mass. LEXIS 204 (Mass. 1878).

123 Mass. 579 (Cooney v. Burt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

London Clothes, Ltd. v. Maryland Casualty Co.
63 N.E.2d 577 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1945)
Riley v. Brusendorff
226 Mass. 310 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1917)
Doherty v. Phoenix Insurance
224 Mass. 310 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Kinney v. Emery
37 N.J. Eq. 339 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1883)
St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Rapp
39 Ark. 558 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1882)
Nye v. Old Colony Railroad
124 Mass. 241 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1878)