Hosmer v. Hoitt
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Motion to strike off a default and continue a case in the Superior Court. Hearing before Mason, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows.
Read the full summary
Motion to strike off a default and continue a case in the Superior Court. Hearing before Mason, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The action was one of contract, in which the writ was dated December 24, 1891, and was returnable to the Superior Court on the first Monday of February, 1892. On March 4 following, an affidavit of no defence was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, and, no counter affidavit being filed, on motion made on April 11, 1892, the case was advanced for speedy trial, and was put upon the trial list. While the case was so upon the trial list,…
1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.
There has been no actual entry of judgment, either on the docket or in the extended records of the court. If the case went to judgment, it did so merely by force of the general order, “that judgment be entered on the first Monday of every month, and on the next day thereafter whenever said Monday is a legal holiday, in all actions . . . which are ripe for judgment, unless the party entitled thereto otherwise requests in writing.” But the case was not “ripe for judgment,” and so not within the terms of the order. The defendant was defaulted when the case was reached for trial; but the default…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. LambertSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Dalton-Ingersoll Co. v. FiskeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- Hutchinson v. Manchester Street RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
- Naderhoff v. Geo. Benz & SonsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
- American Wood Working Machinery Co. v. FurbushMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.