Commonwealth v. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189 (Mass. 1883). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189 (Mass. 1883). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
25 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Grace (mass, 1978-09-29)
Treatment trajectory · 1901 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1901 1963 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Commonwealth v. Grace
Mass. · 1978 · confidence medium
See Commonwealth v. Morgan, 280 Mass. 392, 394 (1932) (failure to except to portion of the jury charge cannot be raised as a matter of right on motion for new trial); Commonwealth v. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189, 190 (1883) (where defendant failed to except to portion of jury charge at trial, defendant had no ground to except to denial of motion for new trial).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Commonwealth v. McLaughlin
Mass. · 1973 · confidence medium
In Commonwealth v. Dascalakis, 246 Mass. 12, 24 (1923), we said: “It has been the unbroken practice both under the statute and at common law respecting motions for new trial not to examine anew the original trial for the detection of errors which might have been raised by exceptions taken at the trial.” Commonwealth v. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189, 190 (1883).
cited Cited "see" Crowdis v. Hayward
Mass. · 1919 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Morrison, 134 Mass. 189 ; Loveland v. Rand, 200 Mass. 142 .
Commonwealth
v.
Ann Morrison
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Jan 26, 1883.
134 Mass. 189
J. L. Eldridge, for the defendant., G. Marston, Attorney General, for the Commonwealth.
Colburn.
Cited by 25 opinions  |  Published
Colburn, J.

The only exception upon which the defendant relies, as the case is presented to us upon her brief, is to the overruling of the third, fourth and fifth grounds, or reasons, stated in her motion for a new trial. No authority is cited except the Pub. Sts. c. 153, § 8.

These reasons for a new trial relate entirely to rulings, or omissions to rule, during the progress of the trial and before verdict, to which the defendant had full opportunity to except, if she saw fit, but omitted to do so; and her motion for a new trial was addressed to the discretion of the court, and to the exercise of that discretion she has no ground of exception. Lowell Gas Light Co. v. Bean, 1 Allen, 274. Kidney v. Richards, 10 Allen, 419. Phillips v. Soule, 6 Allen, 150. Whittaker v. West Boylston, 97 Mass. 273. McAllister v. Burrill, 98 Mass. 334. Behan v. Williams, 123 Mass. 366.

There are cases of motions for new trials, based upon something which has occurred since the trial, or which was not known until after the trial, which raise questions of law, to the rulings upon which exceptions will lie, and it is to such cases that the statute upon which the defendant relies relates. Lowell Gas Light Co. v. Bean, ubi supra. Woodward v. Leavitt, 107 Mass. 453, 460. Commonwealth v. Tobin, 125 Mass. 203. Munde v. Lambie, 125 Mass. 367. Exceptions overruled.