Dow v. Casey

Citation194 Mass. 48,79 N.E. 810
Decision Date08 January 1907
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

Nathan D. Pratt, John J. Devine, and Robt. J. Crowley, for petitioners.

J Gilbert Hill, City Sol., for respondent.



These six cases all present the same questions. The first three are petitions to prove exceptions, and each of the last three is an appeal from an order of the superior court, affirming an order of the mayor of Lowell removing the applicant for a review from his office as a member of the board of police of the city of Lowell, which order of the superior court includes an order disallowing exceptions taken by the applicant. The three applicants, after a hearing, were removed by the mayor from their respective offices as members of the police board of Lowell. Each of them then filed in the superior court, under Rev. Laws, c. 100, § 4, an application for a review of the charges against him, the evidence submitted thereunder and the findings thereon by the mayor. At the hearing in the superior court on these applications each of the applicants requested certain rulings, and took an exception to the refusal of the judge to give them. The fundamental question is whether this refusal was a subject for an exception, and whether the order affirming the order of the mayor and disallowing the exceptions may be appealed from to this court.

The section of the statute just referred to provides for the removal of license commissioners by the mayor for cause, 'after charges preferred, reasonable notice thereof and a hearing thereon, and the mayor shall in the order of removal state his reasons therefor.' The record shows that a full hearing, occupying many days, was had before the mayor, after general charges had been preferred against the commissioners of which they had notice in writing, and that they were personally present, and were represented by able counsel at the hearing. The mayor, in connection with his order for a removal stated his reasons therefor in writing. No objection was made at the hearing in regard to the form of the charges, their sufficiency, or the notice of the hearing upon them. The requests for rulings at the hearing in the superior court all relate to the preferring of charges, their sufficiency, the notices given to the license commissioners, and the legality of the hearing upon such charges with such notices. The judge of the superior court made full findings of fact in regard to the matters covered by the requests.


To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Jones v. Motorbuses, 12.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 2 Febrero 1939
    ...tried and may be used to designate any proceeding for review by which a case is transmitted from one tribunal to another. Dow v. Casey, 194 Mass. 48, 79 N.E. 810. According to our State Constitution, the Supreme Court shall have power to issue writs of error, habeas corpus, mandamus, quo wa......
  • In the Matter of Greybull Valley Irrigation District
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 19 Noviembre 1935
    ...... district court to the Supreme Court for review, including not. only an appeal under the direct [48 Wyo. 530] appeal statute,. but also a proceeding by petition in error. See Caldwell. v. State, 12 Wyo. 206, 211, 74 P. 496; Dow v. Casey, 194 Mass. 48, 79 N.E. 810; State ex rel. Lamar v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 41 Fla. 363, 27 So. 221; Dorris Motor Car Co. v. Colburn, 307 Mo. 137,. 158, 270 S.W. 339, 346. To carry out the legislative purpose. it was not necessary to shorten the statutory limitation of. the time for taking ......
  • Swan v. Justices of Superior Court
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • 9 Febrero 1916
    ...‘appeal’ here is used in a broad general sense,' so as to cover all the ordinary proceedings for a revision by this court. Dow v. Casey, 194 Mass. 48, 50, 79 N. E. 810. But the writ of certiorari is of extraordinary nature. It is one of the ancient prerogative writs, whose history stretches......
  • In re Dorris Motor Car Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 12 Marzo 1925
    ...... with the result of such re-examination. In another sense, and. a very frequent one, it denotes all kinds of proceedings for. the review of cases -- all proceedings commonly known as. appellate [ Nebraska Loan & Trust Co. v. Lincoln & B. H. R. Co., 53 Nebr. 246, 248; Dow v. Casey, 194. Mass. 48; City of Rockford v. Compton, 115 Ill.App. 406]; and we are persuaded that it was in the latter sense. that the term was used in the act under consideration. In. Doe Run Lead Co. v. Maynard, 283 Mo. 646, decided at. the April term, 1920, this court held that an appeal ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT