Dempsey v. Board of Trustees of the Boston Public School Teachers' Retirement Fund

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

Dempsey v. Board of Trustees of the Boston Public School Teachers' Retirement Fund

3 Mass. App. Div. 383

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedOctober 27, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Mass. App. Div. 383 (Dempsey v. Board of Trustees of the Boston Public School Teachers' Retirement Fund) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dempsey v. Board of Trustees of the Boston Public School Teachers' Retirement Fund, 3 Mass. App. Div. 383 (Mass. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Bolster, C. J.

The original writ described the defendants only by the above title. There is at law no such legal person. The named defendant, so-called, is neither a natural person, nor a corporation, nor an association as defined in G. L. (Ter. Ed.) Ch. 182, sec. 6, cf. Bouchard v. First People’s Trust, 253 Mass. 351, nor is the writ a writ in rem. No valid judgment could be entered upon such a writ nor could any execution be effectively served. The fact that counsel assumed to accept service “for the de[384]*384fendants” cannot give jurisdiction where there is none, and the court must take notice of the limitations upon its own power. This writ is void. Since the plaintiff does not wish to amend, we do not decide whether such a writ is amendable. The case cited appears to ' indicate that it is.

Action dismissed.

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

Bolster, C. J.

The original writ described the defendants only by the above title. There is at law no such legal person. The named defendant, so-called, is neither a natural person, nor a corporation, nor an association as defined in G. L. (Ter. Ed.) Ch. 182, sec. 6, cf. Bouchard v. First People’s Trust, 253 Mass. 351, nor is the writ a writ in rem. No valid judgment could be entered upon such a writ nor could any execution be effectively served. The fact that counsel assumed to accept service “for the de[384]*384fendants” cannot give jurisdiction where there is none, and the court must take notice of the limitations upon its own power. This writ is void. Since the plaintiff does not wish to amend, we do not decide whether such a writ is amendable. The case cited appears to ' indicate that it is.

Action dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Mass. App. Div. 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dempsey-v-board-of-trustees-of-the-boston-public-school-teachers-massdistctapp-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack