Anderson v. Albertstamm
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, to recover $300, alleged to be due the plaintiff, an attorney at law, for professional services. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., the plaintiff testified that he had been engaged in general practice for more than nine years; that his office expenses were $150 per month; that on Saturday, October 15, 1898, the defendant, whom the plaintiff had not previously known, came to the plaintiff’s office in company with a young lawyer named Samuel…
Read the full summary
Contract, to recover $300, alleged to be due the plaintiff, an attorney at law, for professional services. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., the plaintiff testified that he had been engaged in general practice for more than nine years; that his office expenses were $150 per month; that on Saturday, October 15, 1898, the defendant, whom the plaintiff had not previously known, came to the plaintiff’s office in company with a young lawyer named Samuel Fine, who had been a student in the law school when the plaintiff was an instructor in equity there; that Fine introduced…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The defendant objects to the hypothetical questions put to the experts upon the ground that the hypothesis in each was not in accordance with any view of the facts which the jury could properly take of the evidence, and therefore the questions should not have been allowed.
Where expert testimony is offered by way of answers to hypothetical questions, much must be left to the discretion of the presiding justice. The jury are instructed to disregard the answers unless they find the facts as assumed in the questions; but as it cannot be known in advance what may be the ultimate decision of the…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TuckerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Commonwealth v. RussMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Carroll v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Commonwealth v. NoxonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Commonwealth v. StirlingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1966
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.