Crocker v. City of Lowell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract by the trustees under the will of Edwin C. Swift, late of Beverly, against the city of Lowell, for the sum of $9,540 paid under protest by the plaintiffs as a tax and alleged to have been assessed illegally because no trustee or beneficiary of the trust resided in Lowell. Writ dated November 13, 1916. In the Superior Court the case was tried before Chase, J., without a jury. The question at issue and the essential evidence are stated or described in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Contract by the trustees under the will of Edwin C. Swift, late of Beverly, against the city of Lowell, for the sum of $9,540 paid under protest by the plaintiffs as a tax and alleged to have been assessed illegally because no trustee or beneficiary of the trust resided in Lowell. Writ dated November 13, 1916. In the Superior Court the case was tried before Chase, J., without a jury. The question at issue and the essential evidence are stated or described in the opinion. At the close of the evidence the defendant filed a motion asking the judge to rule that upon all the evidence the finding…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The only question involved in this case was whether one of the plaintiffs, named Bailey, was domiciled in Lowell or in Greenfield in the State of New Hampshire in 1916. Bailey testified to facts which showed that his domicil was in Greenfield. It is manifest from the general finding in favor of the plaintiffs that the judge believed this testimony. The credibility of this evidence was wholly for the determination of the trial judge. Therefore there was no error of law in the refusal to make the findings requested by the defendant.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rogers v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Marble v. BloomMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926