Legal Opinion

Finkelman v. Kaufman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 5, 1958PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Exceptions overruled, with double costs to the plaintiff. In the absence of an abuse of discretion, which was not shown here, the refusal to grant a postponement of a trial presents no question of law. Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manuf. Co. 237 Mass. 5. An exception alleged to have been taken to a ruling made by a judge at a pre-trial hearing who was still in service and different from the trial judge could not have been included in a bill of exceptions allowed by the latter. Brooks v. Shaw, 197 Mass. 376, 378-379. No exception lies to the refusal to grant special leave to file requests for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brooks v. ShawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  2. Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  3. Donnelly v. LarkinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
  4. Robertson v. Boston & Northern Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
  5. Gibbons v. DavisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hebner v. McMahonMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2008
  2. Green v. Swift & Bachman, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1961
  3. Kalus v. Thompson Club Unit Owners' TrustMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API