Petition of Scano
| Decision Date | 30 October 1958 |
| Citation | 153 N.E.2d 642,338 Mass. 7 |
| Parties | Petition of Domenic T. SCANO, petitioner. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
William Bernstein, Worcester, for petitioner.
James C. Donnelly, Jr., Worcester, for respondent.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and WILLIAMS, COUNIHAN, WHITTEMORE and CUTTER, JJ.
This is a petition, brought purportedly pursuant to G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 117, to establish exceptions alleged to have been taken in an action of tort in which the petitioner was the plaintiff and the respondent New England Theatres, Inc., was the defendant. The action was for personal injuries received in a fall on premises of the defendant. After a trial without jury the judge made a finding for the plaintiff and assessed damages in the sum of $1,800. The plaintiff field (1) a motion for a new trial on the ground that the damages were inadequate and (2) requests for rulings relating to that motion. After hearing, the motion was denied. No action was taken with respect to the requests, which are to be treated as denied. Mitchell v. Silverstein, 323 Mass. 239, 240-241, 81 N.E.2d 364. The plaintiff excepted, and filed a bill of exceptions, which was disallowed 'for the reason that the denial of the plaintiff's motion for a new trial involved no opinion, ruling, direction or judgment of law.'
The respondent contends that G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 117, 1 provides a remedy only where the exceptions are disallowed for the reason that they do not conform to the truth. We think, however, that the language of the section, which is the only statute relating to the subject, is broad enough to cover any case where a bill of exceptions is disallowed irrespective of the precise form of the words used by the judge in disallowing it. See Petition of C. F. Hovey Co., 254 Mass. 551, 553-554, 151 N.E. 66. Otherwise there might be a grievance without a remedy. We are sure that the Legislature did not so intend.
While as a general rule no inquiry into the merits of a bill of exceptions is open upon a petition to establish them, the petition may be dismissed if it is obvious that there is nothing in the exceptions if proved. Fitch v. Jefferson, 175 Mass. 56, 57, 55 N.E. 623; In re Bishop, 208 Mass. 405, 407, 94 N.E. 479; Petition of Koch, 225 Mass. 148, 150, 114 N.E. 79; Commonwealth v. Vallarelli, 273 Mass. 240, 247, 173 N.E. 582; In re Graustein, 305 Mass. 571, 26 N.E.2d 536.
Here there is no substantial question of law. The statute relating to motions for a new trial in actions tried without jury gives but two grounds for filing such motions as of right: mistake of law and newly discovered evidence. G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 129. By implication, therefore, that the finding is against the evidence or the weight of the evidence is not a ground. O'Grady v. Supple, 148 Mass. 522, 523, 20 N.E. 114; Menici v. Orton Crane & Shovel Co., 285 Mass. 499, 502, 189 N.E. 839; Nerbonne v. New England S. S. Co., 288 Mass. 508, 510, 193 N.E. 72. In principle, excessive or inadequate damages constitute one form of a finding contrary to the weight of the evidence. 'In this court as an appellate tribunal an award of damages must stand unless to make it or to permit it to stand was an abuse of discretion on the part of the court below, amounting to an error of law.' Bartley v. Phillips, 317 Mass. 35, 43, 57 N.E.2d 26, 31. There was no error of law arising for the first time in the hearing of the motion for a new trial. Cerrato v. Miller, 264 Mass. 533, 163 N.E. 251; Murnane v. MacDonald, 294 Mass. 372, 373, 2 N.E.2d 194; Palma v. Racz, 302 Mass. 249, 250-251, 19 N.E.2d 8; Kinnear v. General Mills, Inc., 308 Mass. 344, 349, 32 N.E.2d 263; Hartmann v. Boston Herald-Traveler Corp., 323 Mass. 56, 60-61, 80 N.E.2d 16; Mitchell v. Silverstein, 323 Mass. 239, 241-242, 81 N.E.2d 364; Moran v. Pieroni, Inc., 326 Mass. 516, 517, 95 N.E.2d 296; Statkus v. Metropolitan Transit Authority, 335 Mass. 172, 174-175, 138 N.E.2d 751. The damages which had been found were substantial and not nominal. There had been no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Antonellis v. Northgate Const. Corp.
... ... Scano, petitioner, 338 Mass. 7, 9, 153 N.E.2d 642; Gamer v. Milton, 346 Mass. 617, [362 Mass. 852] 621, 195 N.E.2d 65. Upon a jury-waived trial such ... ...
-
Tourles, In re
...the exceptions were not properly saved or accurately stated but that the bill as a whole was not in correct form. See Scano, petitioner, 338 Mass. 7, 8, 153 N.E.2d 642. An examination of the transcript of testimony leads us to hold that the bill should not be disallowed. Most of the excepti......
-
Campanella & Cardi Const. Co. v. Com.
...by the exception to the denial of the motion on the ground that the finding was aginst the weight of the evidence. Petition of Scano, 338 Mass. ----, 153 N.E.2d 642. 2. To judge the correctness of the finding for the respondent on stated facts we must accept those facts as the judge has fou......
-
Gamer v. Town of Milton
...with respect to that '[t]here was no error of law arising for the first time in the hearing of the motion.' Scano, petitioner, 338 Mass. 7, 9, 153 N.E.2d 642, 644. Exceptions 1 For decisions both in England and in the United States, which have cited the Popplewell case, see English v. Metro......