Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Prince

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided March 31, 1976PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

There was no error in the admission de bene of the wife’s testimony as to the purchase price of the three-year old television set her husband had purchased. The purchase price was relevant evidence in determining the value of the set. Schneider v. Hayward, 231 Mass. 352, 357 (1918). “There is wide discretion in the trial judge to determine what evidence of value shall be deemed admissible in the circumstances.” Salter v. Leventhal, 337 Mass. 679, 691 (1958). Any objection based on hearsay was waived by the failure to make a motion to strike the testimony after it became apparent that her…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  2. Salter v. LeventhalMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
  3. Commonwealth v. EarlyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  4. Brek's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
  5. Schneider v. HaywardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. WoodMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
  2. Commonwealth v. CivelloMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API