Given v. Johnson

• Decision Date: 13 January 1913
• Citation: 100 N.E. 369,213 Mass. 251
• Parties: GIVEN v. JOHNSON et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

213 Mass. 251

100 N.E. 369

GIVEN v. JOHNSON et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Middlesex.

January 13, 1913

COUNSEL

Daniel B. Beard of Boston, for appellant.

Boutwell & Hastings and F. P. Miller, all of Boston, for respondents.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

An appeal in a proceeding at law brings before this court only the record.If it be assumed in favor of the appellant that his requests for rulings with the marginal note of refusal were incorporated into the letter of the judge by which he ordered the petition dismissed, this was no part of the record.It has been decided many times that even a memorandum signed by a judge in an action at law is not a part of the record unless inserted in a bill of exceptions or report.Cressey v. Cressey,213 Mass. 191, 99 N.E. 972;Regal v. Lyon,212 Mass. 230, 98 N.E. 698, and cases cited in each opinion.

There is no error apparent upon this record.If the appellant seasonably presented pertinent requests for rulings, and the trial judge either refused them or made an adverse finding without passing upon them, his remedy was by taking exceptions at the time and filing a bill of exceptions within a proper time thereafter.John Hetherington & Sons, Ltd v. William Firth Co., 210 Mass. S, 17, 95 N.E. 961;Hurley v. Boston Elev. Ry.,213 Mass. 192, 99 N.E 1056.But the appellant took no exception, nor did he file any bill of exceptions.He did nothing except to make a request that the judge pass upon his requests for rulings which apparently the judge already had done, and that he make findings of...