TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Commonwealth v. Svarnas

Commonwealth v. Charles Svarnas

Commonwealth v. Svarnas, 113 N.E. 569 (Mass. 1916)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 8, 1916
Judges
Rugg
Citations
113 N.E. 569224 Mass. 5971916 Mass. LEXIS 1166
Headnotes
Police, District and Municipal Courts. Under R. L. c. 160, §§ 11, 36; c. 161, § 5, an assistant clerk of a district court has authority to receive a complaint addressed to the court'and to administer the oath to the complainant.
Summary
Complaint, received and sworn to in the District Court of Southern Essex on May 24, 1916, for the alleged violation of a regulation of the board of health of the city of Lynn. On appeal to the Superior Court the defendant was tried before McLaughlin, J. The defendant renewed a motion, which had been denied in the district court, that the complaint be quashed “for the reason that it was received by and sworn to before the assistant clerk of said court, at a time when said court was not in session, and said assistant clerk had no warrant or authority in law so to receive said complaint or to take the oath of the complainant thereto.” The judge denied the motion, and upon the defendant’s plea of guilty imposed a fine of $5. At the request of the defendant, the judge stayed sentence under R. L. c. 220, § 3, and reported the case for determination by this court upon the question raised by the motion to quash. The case was submitted on briefs.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Rugg

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Rugg, C. J.

The only question presented on this record is whether an assistant clerk of a district court has authority to receive a complaint addressed to the court and to administer the oath thereon.

He has such authority. R. L. c. 161, § 5. Commonwealth v. Wetherbee, 153 Mass. 159 . He holds an office created by law. R. L. c. 160, §§ 11, 36.

Sentence to stand.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1929: 119292026peak 1929 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Everett Trust Co. v. Waltham Theatre Amusement Co.166 N.E. 831 (Mass. 1929)

Most recent

  1. Everett Trust Co. v. Waltham Theatre Amusement Co.166 N.E. 831 (Mass. 1929)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Commonwealth v. Wetherbee, 26 N.E. 414 (Mass. 1891) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list