Corey

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Corey

149 N.E. 203, 253 Mass. 498, 1925 Mass. LEXIS 1271

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 20, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 149 N.E. 203 (Corey) 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

Corey, 149 N.E. 203, 253 Mass. 498, 1925 Mass. LEXIS 1271 (Mass. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

This is a petition to establish the truth of exceptions. The petition is not verified by affidavit. The jurat annexed shows that it was acknowledged as the free act and deed of the petitioner. That is not verification by affidavit. It is manifest from the facts disclosed by the petitioner at the bar that there was no compliance with the requirement of Rule 6 of the Rules for the Regulation of Practice before the Full Court, that the petitioner “shall, before filing his petition, give notice thereof to the adverse party, by delivering a copy thereof to him or his attorney of record.” There is no allegation in the petition that the bill of exceptions was disallowed by the judge of the Superior Court. Without further discussion, it is plain that the petition cannot be maintained. Fuller, petitioner, 219 Mass. 209. John Henry Co. petitioner, 222 Mass. 182. Thorndike, petitioner, 244 Mass. 429.

Petition dismissed.

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

By the Court.

This is a petition to establish the truth of exceptions. The petition is not verified by affidavit. The jurat annexed shows that it was acknowledged as the free act and deed of the petitioner. That is not verification by affidavit. It is manifest from the facts disclosed by the petitioner at the bar that there was no compliance with the requirement of Rule 6 of the Rules for the Regulation of Practice before the Full Court, that the petitioner “shall, before filing his petition, give notice thereof to the adverse party, by delivering a copy thereof to him or his attorney of record.” There is no allegation in the petition that the bill of exceptions was disallowed by the judge of the Superior Court. Without further discussion, it is plain that the petition cannot be maintained. Fuller, petitioner, 219 Mass. 209. John Henry Co. petitioner, 222 Mass. 182. Thorndike, petitioner, 244 Mass. 429.

Petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 N.E. 203, 253 Mass. 498, 1925 Mass. LEXIS 1271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corey-mass-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack