Legal Opinion

Oxley v. Water Supply District

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided May 24, 1974PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This petition for assessment of damages was tried to a jury in the Superior Court pursuant to G. L. c. 79, § 14. Following a verdict for the petitioner, the respondent’s motion for a new trial was allowed, subject to a remittitur, for the reason that the award of damages was excessive. Through her bill of exceptions the petitioner seeks to have us pass upon that action of the trial judge. To pursue that course in our view would be inexpedient and, in our discretion, we decline to follow it. The allowance of the motion for a new trial was interlocutory and the case will not be ripe for final…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Anti v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  2. Barnett v. LoudMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  3. Donovan v. DonovanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  4. Farris v. St. Paul's Baptist ChurchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. D'Annolfo v. Stoneham Housing AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  2. Haufler v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API