Barnett v. Rosenberg
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, as amended, on March 25, 1908, and further amended on February 28, 1910, to reach and apply certain equitable assets, alleged to be in the hands of the other defendants, to the payment of $1,200 with interest from' October 28, 1907, alleged to be due to the plaintiff from the principal defendant Philip Rosenberg. The case was referred to Edwin 1ST. Hill, Esquire, as master.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, as amended, on March 25, 1908, and further amended on February 28, 1910, to reach and apply certain equitable assets, alleged to be in the hands of the other defendants, to the payment of $1,200 with interest from' October 28, 1907, alleged to be due to the plaintiff from the principal defendant Philip Rosenberg. The case was referred to Edwin 1ST. Hill, Esquire, as master. He filed a report, and the case afterwards was heard by Hardy, J., who denied a motion of the defendants Philip Rosenberg and Israel Rosenberg to recommit the report with an…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
This case is before us upon the defendants’ appeal from the order denying the motion to recommit the report to the master in order that he may report the evidence, from the order overruling the defendants’ exceptions to the master’s report and from the final decree.
A motion to recommit is addressed to the discretion of the court, and ordinarily will not be granted in the absence of a special reason for it. Henderson v. Foster, 182 Mass. 447. Nothing appears in the present case to show that the judge improperly exercised his discretion in denying the motion.
Eight exceptions were taken to the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Henderson v. FosterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Ellis v. FeltMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
3Cited by1 opinion
- Baush Machine Tool Co. v. HillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918