Fiske v. Parker
This text of 27 Mass. 134 (Fiske v. Parker) 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.
Opinion
From the nature of the evidence rejected, the instructions of the judge must have been, that if the jury thought it unreasonable to require the defendant to warn all the persons named in the order, he vvas not obliged to warn any of them. We think this was incorrect. The commanding officer is authorized to require this duty, and a non-commissioned officer or private has no right to inquire into the reasonableness of the order, or, at least, he does so at his peril. It may be that he has a good excuse for not performing it in full, as that he is physically unable, but he is not excused from performing such part of it as may be within his power.1
Mew trial granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 Mass. 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fiske-v-parker-mass-1830.