Krauss v. Cope
This text of 61 N.E. 220 (Krauss v. Cope) 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
The general rule is that all papers which are duly admitted in evidence should go to the jury; but it is in the discretion of the judge to give or withhold them, and his decision upon the question is not a subject of exception. Whithead v. Keyes, 3 Allen, 495. Burghardt v. Van Deusen, 4 Allen, 374. Farnum v. Pitcher, 151 Mass. 470, 476. While auditors’ reports are made evidence by statute, and while it is the usual [23]*23practice to allow them to go to the jury room, the statute prescribes no rule as to whether they shall be taken to the jury room, and if in the discretion of the presiding judge, an audit- or’s report is not allowed to be taken by the jury when they retire to consider of their verdict, no exception lies to the refusal.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 N.E. 220, 180 Mass. 22, 1901 Mass. LEXIS 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krauss-v-cope-mass-1901.