McInnis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

McInnis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.

76 N.E. 911, 190 Mass. 386, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 1092

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 28, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 76 N.E. 911 (McInnis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.) 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

McInnis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co., 76 N.E. 911, 190 Mass. 386, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 1092 (Mass. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Losing, J.

[After the foregoing statement of the case.] Passing by the fact that the question was in fact a preliminary one and treating it as a question asking where she said her husband had been, it was competent for the purpose for which it was admitted. The answer was not responsive. No objection was made to the answer and no motion was made to strike it out. The only exception before us is the exception to the question. That exception must be overruled.

So ordered.

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

Losing, J.

[After the foregoing statement of the case.] Passing by the fact that the question was in fact a preliminary one and treating it as a question asking where she said her husband had been, it was competent for the purpose for which it was admitted. The answer was not responsive. No objection was made to the answer and no motion was made to strike it out. The only exception before us is the exception to the question. That exception must be overruled.

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 N.E. 911, 190 Mass. 386, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 1092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcinnis-v-boston-elevated-railway-co-mass-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack