Laxton v. Hay

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Laxton v. Hay

98 N.E. 29, 211 Mass. 463, 1912 Mass. LEXIS 808

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedApril 1, 1912

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 98 N.E. 29 (Laxton v. Hay) 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

Laxton v. Hay, 98 N.E. 29, 211 Mass. 463, 1912 Mass. LEXIS 808 (Mass. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Rugg, C. J.

This is an action of tort to recover damages for the alienation of the affections of the plaintiff’s husband by the defendant. At the close of the charge there was a colloquy between the judge and counsel the substance of which was that the plaintiff’s counsel desired to have the cause go to the jury with the understanding that if a verdict was returned in excess of the ad damnum of the writ he should ask leave to amend the writ. This course was satisfactory to the presiding judge.

It is legally possible to amend in this regard at any time before judgment. R. L. c. 173, § 48. The allowance of such an amendment, even after verdict, rests in the judicial discretion of the court. Ellis v. Ridgway, 1 Allen, 501. Luddington v. Goodnow, 168 Mass. 223.

There was nothing in the language of the judge beyond his power or tending to prejudice the defendant.

Exceptions overruled.

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