Perkins v. Spaulding
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for malicious prosecution. Writ dated November 27, 1901. At the trial in the Superior Court before Hardy, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions to the exclusion of certain evidence and the refusal of a certain ruling which are stated by the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.
1. We think the defendant should have been allowed to put in the evidence which was excluded. The plaintiff had been the manager of a hotel owned by the defendant and in running it had been allowed to use a large part of the furnishings therein, belonging also to the defendant. The complaint, in form for larceny, was in fact for the embezzlement of some of these furnishings, as also was the indictment. At the trial the evidence tended to show that the defendant had reason to believe that certain of these furnishings owned by him including those named in the complaint and indictment were…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cardival v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Carmody v. Boston Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Commonwealth v. RussellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Ripley v. McBarronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Falvey v. FaxonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stanley Westreich v. Walter P. McFarlandCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1970
- Lindsay v. WestCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
- Flader v. SmithSupreme Court of Colorado · 1947