Graves v. Hicks
| Decision Date | 05 March 1906 |
| Citation | 77 N.E. 831,191 Mass. 102 |
| Parties | GRAVES v. HICKS et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Henry D. Yeaton, for appellant.
M. J. Creed and J. Porter Crosby, for appellee.
This case was heard before a justice of the superior court. He made a memorandum, and a final decree was entered for the plaintiff. The case is before us upon an appeal by the defendant Hicks from that decree.
The decree is certainly supported by the findings. It is objected that the findings are not warranted by the evidence. The evidence was largely oral. In such case the findings of the trial court are not to be set aside unless they are clearly wrong. The evidence has been carefully considered, and we are of opinion that it amply warrants the findings, and we cannot say that they are wrong.
The decree is to be so far modified as to include the costs of this appeal, and, as so modified, should be affirmed. So ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carchidi v. Kalayjian
...decree is to be modified so as to include the costs of the appeal and as thus modified is affirmed. See, for example, Graves v. Hicks, 191 Mass. 102, 103, 77 N. E. 831;Jennings v. Demmon, 194 Mass. 108, 113, 80 N. E. 471;Elliott v. Baker, 194 Mass. 518, 523, 80 N. E. 450;Staples v. Mullen, ......
- Hill v. Hall
-
Carchidi v. Kalayjian
...final decree is to be modified so as to include the costs of the appeal and as thus modified is affirmed. See, for example, Graves v. Hicks, 191 Mass. 102 , 103; Jennings v. Demmon, 194 Mass. 108 , 113; v. Baker, 194 Mass. 518 , 523; Staples v. Mullen, 196 Mass. 132 , 134. That amplificatio......
-
Elliott v. Baker
... ... The ... decree is to be so far modified as to include the costs of ... this appeal, and as modified affirmed. Gravesnd as modified affirmed. Graves v ... Hicks ... ...