Town of Winthrop v. Town of Athol
| Decision Date | 22 October 1913 |
| Parties | TOWN OF WINTHROP v. TOWN OF ATHOL. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Harold W. Orcutt, of Boston, for petitioner.
Jas. A. Stiles and Clifford S. Anderson, both of Gardner, for defendant.
Ordinarily it is a question of fact, the decision of which depends in large measure upon sound judicial discretion, whether, under the law, justice to all parties concerned requires the issuance of a writ of review. Scituate Water Co. v. Simmons, 167 Mass. 313, 45 N.E. 750; Stillman v. Donovan, 170 Mass. 360, 49 N.E. 628; Welch v. Chase, 213 Mass. 519, 100 N.E. 634.
The decision of the court below was based upon this principle and plainly no error of law is disclosed in its application. Where an excepting party failed to get his exceptions passed upon for three years after filing them, at the expiration of which time the judge who heard the case died, and three years more elapse before the exceptions are dismissed, it was a pure matter of discretion whether review should be granted. See Meehan, Petitioner, 208 Mass. 60, 94 N.E. 393.
The only question of law presented on this record is whether a judgment in favor of this defendant in an action against it by the town of Stoughton involving the settlement of the same pauper was a bar to this action. Clearly it was not. The parties were not the same, nor were they privies. Braintree v. Hingham, 17 Mass. 432; Shutesbury v. Hadley, 133 Mass. 242.
Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial