Legal Opinion

Carp v. Kaplan

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 24, 1925PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

This action to recover damages for breach of contract was tried before a jury. At the close of the evidence the counsel for the defendant submitted to the judge among other requests for rulings this: “Upon all the evidence the plaintiff is not entitled to recover.” This was *228in substance a motion for a directed verdict in favor of the defendant, and it was commingled with other requests for instructions to the jury. It is manifest that this was not in accordance with the part of Rule 44 of the Superior Court (1923) which requires that “ The question whether the court should order a verdict…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sullivan v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  2. Tudor v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
  3. Gibbs v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  4. Everett-Morgan Co. v. Boyajian PharmacyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  5. Oliver Ditson Co. v. TestaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Holton v. American Pastry Products Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
  2. Bray v. HickmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
  3. Calcagno v. P. H. Graham & Sons Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  4. Strom v. American Honda Motor Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  5. Botti v. Venice Grocery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API