Commonwealth v. Gardner
| Decision Date | 08 March 1922 |
| Citation | 134 N.E. 638,241 Mass. 86 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. GARDNER. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Report from Superior Court, Berkshire County; Nelson P. Brown, Judge.
G. C. Gardner was convicted of an offense, and the case was reported on the question whether there was error in denying defendant's motion for directed verdict. Judgment affirmed.
Charles H. Wright, Dist. Atty., of Pittsfield, and Rufus H. Tilton, Asst. Dist. Atty., of Springfield, for the Commonwealth.
Charles G. Gardner and Ralph S. Spooner, both of Springfield, for defendant.
The defendant was charged with violating section 15, c. 655, St. 1913. He was the superintendent in charge of the construction and prepared the plans for an addition to a schoolhouse in Dalton in 1915. Plans for the alterations, including those for heating, ventilation and sanitation, were filed with the supervisor of plans, as required by the statute. The plans were disapproved by the supervisor by letter of May 17, 1915, in which the defendant was directed to provide means of bringing fresh air into the addition, ‘with fresh air rooms in the basement, bringing the air in at the rate of thirty cubic feet for each pupil per minute on the warm side of the room, approximately eight feet above the floor, and taking out the foul air at or near the floor line, near the same location.’ The defendant proceeded with the construction of the alterations in disregard of these directions for ventilation, and in place thereof installed the system of ventilation shown by the original plans submitted to the supervisor. It was agreed that there was no other violation of the statute or of the regulations of the state police made thereunder, and it was also agreed that the system of ventilation provided and installed by defendant was reasonable and adequate as was the system prescribed by the supervisor, and that the requirements of the supervisor, relating to ventilation, were not necessary to prevent the spread of fire or its communication from any steam boiler or heating apparatus in the building.
In the superior court the only evidence was the agreed statement of facts. The defendant moved for a directed verdict. The motion was denied and the jury were instructed to return a verdict of guilty. Defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $50, and the case was reported to this court at the request of the defendant with the consent of the district attorney, on the question whether there was error in denying the defendant's motion, and in the direction to the jury to return a verdict of guilty upon the evidence.
St. 1913, c. 655, § 15, provided that no building of the kind enumerated, including schoolhouses, should be erected or altered until a copy of the plans and specifications have been deposited with the supervisor of plans of the building inspection department of the district police, by the person causing the erection or alteration, or by the architect thereof. Such plans and specifications were to include those for heating, ventilation and sanitation as the supervisor of plans might require. The statute also enacts that such building shall not be constructed without sufficient means of escape from fire, and the supervisor of plans was given authority to require that the stairways be inclosed, that egress doors and windows shall open outward, that places of egress shall be properly lighted, and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Poulos v. State of New Hampshire
...528; Phoenix Carpet Co. v. State, 118 Ala. 143, 22 So. 627; City of Montpelier v. Mills, 171 Ind. 175, 85 N.E. 6; Commonwealth v. Gardner, 241 Mass. 86, 134 N.E. 638; State v. Orr, 68 Conn. 101, 35 A. 770, 34 L.R.A. 279; City of Malden v. Flynn, 318 Mass. 276, 61 N.E.2d 107. A close paralle......
-
Com. v. Ries
...far as they relate to the extent that the trust company itself directly participated in the Kalman transactions (see Commonwealth v. Gardner, 241 Mass. 86, 134 N.E. 638; Commonwealth v. Ross, 248 Mass. 15, 142 N.E. 791; Commonwealth v. Renfrew, 332 Mass. 492, 126 N.E.2d 109; compare Commonw......
-
City of Malden v. Flynn
... ... by said Section 122 as the city contends and, if not ... justified by some other statutory provision, is void ... Commonwealth v. Hayden, 211 Mass. 296 ... Kilgour ... v. Gratto, 224 Mass. 78 ... Borggaard v. Department of ... Public Works, 298 Mass. 417 ... Tranfaglia v ... Blackington, 24 Pick. 352 ... [318 Mass. 281] ... Commonwealth v ... McCarthy, 225 Mass. 192 ... Commonwealth v ... Gardner, 241 Mass. 86. State v. Orr, 68 Conn ... 101. State v. Stevens, 78 N.H. 268. The defendant was ... entitled to have his application for a permit ... ...
-
State v. Poulos
...of section 31A. Commonwealth v. Blackington, 24 Pick. 352; Commonwealth v. McCarthy, 225 Mass. 192, 114 N.E. 287; Commonwealth v. Gardner, 241 Mass. 86, 134 N.E. 638; State v. Orr, 68 Conn. 101, 35 A. 770, 34 L.R.A. 279; State v. Stevens, 78 N.H. 268, 99 A. 723, L.R.A.1917C, 528. The defend......