Times Film Corp. v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Times Film Corp. v. Commissioner of Public Safety

127 N.E.2d 893, 333 Mass. 62, 1955 Mass. LEXIS 523

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided July 6, 1955·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Wilkins, J.

On the merits this case is governed by Brattle Films, Inc. v. Commissioner of Public Safety, ante, 58. The petitioner, which is a distributor of motion pic *63 ture films and the owner of distribution rights in two specified films, brings this petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the action of the respondent in failing to approve in writing the films for exhibition on the Lord’s day pursuant to G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 136, § 4. 1 The case was reserved and reported without decision by a single justice.

The respondent contends that the only action of his which is here brought into question relates to a mere advisory opinion as to what may be expected in the future. It is suggested that the application contemplated by the statute is one by the particular theatre which intends to exhibit a particular film on a particular Sunday. However that may be, we think that it would be hardly worth while to decide this procedural question. In the Brattle Films case we have decided that § 4 is unconstitutional as applied to the facts in that case. That is enough to dispose of the merits of this matter for all practical purposes. It is not to be assumed that the respondent, who is a public officer and a defendant in the Brattle Films case, will not carry out his duty under the law. Brookline v. Co-Ray Realty Co. Inc. 326 Mass. 206, 214. Mayor of Gloucester v. City Clerk of Gloucester, 327 Mass. 460, 464-465. City Manager of Medford v. Civil Service Commission, 329 Mass. 323, 331.

The petition is to be dismissed without prejudice.

So ordered.

1

Later amendments are not material. St. 1945. c. 575. St. 1953, c. 596. St. 1954, c. 303.

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

Wilkins, J.

On the merits this case is governed by Brattle Films, Inc. v. Commissioner of Public Safety, ante, 58. The petitioner, which is a distributor of motion pic *63 ture films and the owner of distribution rights in two specified films, brings this petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the action of the respondent in failing to approve in writing the films for exhibition on the Lord’s day pursuant to G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 136, § 4. 1 The case was reserved and reported without decision by a single justice.

The respondent contends that the only action of his which is here brought into question relates to a mere advisory opinion as to what may be expected in the future. It is suggested that the application contemplated by the statute is one by the particular theatre which intends to exhibit a particular film on a particular Sunday. However that may be, we think that it would be hardly worth while to decide this procedural question. In the Brattle Films case we have decided that § 4 is unconstitutional as applied to the facts in that case. That is enough to dispose of the merits of this matter for all practical purposes. It is not to be assumed that the respondent, who is a public officer and a defendant in the Brattle Films case, will not carry out his duty under the law. Brookline v. Co-Ray Realty Co. Inc. 326 Mass. 206, 214. Mayor of Gloucester v. City Clerk of Gloucester, 327 Mass. 460, 464-465. City Manager of Medford v. Civil Service Commission, 329 Mass. 323, 331.

The petition is to be dismissed without prejudice.

So ordered.

1

Later amendments are not material. St. 1945. c. 575. St. 1953, c. 596. St. 1954, c. 303.

Times Film Corp. v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 127 N.E.2d 893, 333 Mass. 62, 1955 Mass. LEXIS 523 (Mass. 1955).

Pincite

127 N.E.2d 893 (Times Film Corp. v. Commissioner of Public Safety) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related