Legal Opinion

Condé Nast Press, Inc. v. Cornhill Publishing Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 24, 1926PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWait, J.

The defendant, by its bill of exceptions, does not show that this court has jurisdiction. The requests for findings and rulings, the denial of which underlies the defendant’s right to be heard here, were filed at the end of a trial without a jury in the Superior Court; and there is nothing in its bill to show that any exception was saved at the trial or within three days after receipt of notice from the clerk. Rule 45 of the Superior Court (1923).

If we assume that the exceptions were duly claimed, they must be overruled. There is no exception to a refusal by a trial judge to make a finding of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Parrot v. Mexican Central Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Danforth v. ChandlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  3. Gerrish Dredging Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  4. Hartford v. Massachusetts Bowling Alleys, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  5. Rogers v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Hurley v. OrnsteenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  2. Larson v. Jeffrey-Nichols Motor Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Kelly v. Citizens Finance Co. of Lowell, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  4. Neilson v. Malcolm Kenneth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  5. Juergens v. Venture Capital Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1973

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API