Cooney v. Burt
Decision Date | 10 January 1878 |
Citation | 123 Mass. 579 |
Parties | Patrick H. Cooney v. William L. Burt |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Middlesex. Motion to dismiss the defendant's bill of exceptions to rulings of Pitman, J., at a trial in the Superior Court, at March term 1877. The certificate of the judge upon the bill of exceptions was as follows:
Exceptions dismissed.
H. W. Bragg, for the plaintiff.
C. S. Lincoln, for the defendant.
The question presented does not depend upon the rules which govern the computation of time when the last of a certain number of days allowed by statute or by general rule of court happens to fall on a Sunday or other legal holiday; but upon the construction of the special order made by the judge in this case, which did not define the time by the number of days, but by a particular date, and, as stated in his certificate, was that "the time for filing and presentment of these exceptions was extended by the court to April 12," and clearly did not allow them to be presented to him after that day. The plaintiff, having taken the objection before the allowance of the exceptions, has the right to insist that they were not presented to the judge, as well as filed with the clerk, within the time limited by the judge's order. Gen. Sts. c. 115, § 7. Doherty v. Lincoln, 114 Mass. 362. Commonwealth v. Greenlaw, 119 Mass. 208. Conway v. Callahan, 121 Mass. 165. Walker v. Moors, 122 Mass. 501.
Exceptions dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
London Clothes v. Maryland Cas. Co.
...Co. v. Smith, Saxton & Co. 107 Mo.App. 13. Thompson v. Reynolds, 59 Utah, 416. See cases collected in 16 Am. L. R. 1094. See also Cooney v. Burt, 123 Mass. 579 The principal question presented by the defendant's exceptions is whether there was error in the finding that the oral contract of ......
-
Walsh v. Wyman Lunch Co.
...plaintiffs could move in this court that the exceptions be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Conway v. Callahan, 121 Mass. 165;Cooney v. Burt, 123 Mass. 579;Hale v. Rice, 124 Mass. 292;Browne v. Hale, 127 Mass. 158; R. L. c. 173, § 106. The motion to dismiss on this ground filed in the tr......
-
Doherty v. Phoenix Ins. Co.
...plaintiffs could move in this court that the exceptions be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Conway v. Callahan, 121 Mass. 165;Cooney v. Burt, 123 Mass. 579;Hale v. Rice, 124 Mass. 292;Browne v. Hale, 127 Mass. 158; R. L. c. 173, § 106. The motion to dismiss on this ground filed in the tr......
-
Martin v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
...loses all control over the same, and cannot exercise any discretion whatever. 45 Ark. 102; 39 Ark. 216; 119 Mass. 208; 121 Mass. 165; 123 Mass. 579; 124 Mass. 69 Ind. 290; 98 Ill. 235; 56 Iowa 335; 8 Bush, 480; 6 Bush, 27; 5 Col. 133; 17 Munroe, 603; 90 Ind. 404; 97 Ind. 404. Review cases i......