Harding v. Noyes
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract against the administrator of a surety on a bond to dissolve an attachment. The writ was entered, and an answer filed, at December term 1876 of the Superior Court. On October 11,1877, the defendant filed interrogatories to be answered on oath by the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Contract against the administrator of a surety on a bond to dissolve an attachment. The writ was entered, and an answer filed, at December term 1876 of the Superior Court. On October 11,1877, the defendant filed interrogatories to be answered on oath by the plaintiff. On January 2, 1878, the court ordered answers to the interrogatories to be filed on or before March 1; and, on February 25, extended the time for filing such answers to March 11. On March 8, the attorney of the plaintiff moved for further time to answer the interrogatories; and filed his own affidavit, stating in detail his…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The answers, signed and sworn to by the attorney only, did not comply with the requirement of the statute that they should be signed by the plaintiff himself, and upon his oath. Whether a nonsuit should be entered at the expiration of the time previously fixed for answering, or further time I be allowed to obtain proper answers, was exclusively within the ! discretion of the court below. Gen. Sts. c. 129, §§ 46, 48, 49, 56. Townsend v. Gibbs, 11 Cush. 158. Stern v. Filene, 14 Allen, 9. Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by9 opinions
- Henry L. Sawyer Co. v. BoyajianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- Spinney v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Fratantonio v. Atlantic Refining Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Fels v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Harding v. MorrillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.