Couilliard v. Eaton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort. The declaration contained two counts. The first was in the nature of case, for mutilating a promissory note by removing the defendant’s name therefrom. The second was in the nature of trover, for the conversion of the note.
Read the full summary
Tort. The declaration contained two counts. The first was in the nature of case, for mutilating a promissory note by removing the defendant’s name therefrom. The second was in the nature of trover, for the conversion of the note. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J., at the close of the evidence, the judge declined to give certain rulings requested by the defendant, and submitted to the jury certain specific questions; and, upon answers to them being returned, directed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount of the note. The defendant alleged…
1Opinion of the CourtDevens, J.
It is within the discretion of the court to submit to the jury special questions as to facts in dispute in the trial of a case, and to rule that, as the finding shall be thereon, a verdict *106shall be rendered for either the plaintiff or the defendant. If there are admitted and undisputed facts, these may properly be included as a part of the basis of the ruling. If there are disputed facts, the correct finding upon which is unimportant to the decision of the case, they may be disregarded. When a ruling is made by the court, upon special questions submitted to the jury, that the verdict shall be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ryder v. WilcoxMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by5 opinions
- Thompson v. LoweIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Berwin v. CableMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Alderman v. NobleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- Erickson v. George B. H. Macomber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Cutting v. DaigneauMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890