TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hopkinson v. Kennedy

Thomas Hopkinson & another, trustees v. Stella C. Kennedy

Hopkinson v. Kennedy, 114 N.E. 204 (Mass. 1916)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 28, 1916
Citations
114 N.E. 204225 Mass. 2311916 Mass. LEXIS 1209
Cited by 14
Headnotes
Practice, Civil, Appeal, Requests for rulings. Municipal Court of the City of Boston. Where, at the trial in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston of an action at law the evidence upon the material issues is conflicting and one of the parties presents requests for rulings of law which are based upon the assumption of certain facts and the judge makes findings against him as to those facts and refuses the requests on the ground that they are not applicable to the facts, a report of the case to the Appellate Division and an appeal to this court from an order by them dismissing the report raise no question of law.
Summary
Contract for $68.75, for úse and occupation of premises owned by the plaintiffs. Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated November 2, 1915. At the trial in the Municipal Court, the defendant presented requests for rulings applicable only to findings of fact from which an inference could be made that the plaintiffs had waived their right to the statutory notice of intention to quit. The judge found that there had been no such waiver, and refused the requests on the ground that they were not applicable to the facts found. He found for the plaintiff in the sum of $68.75, and at the request of the defendant reported the case to the Appellate Division, who dismissed the report. The defendant appealed. 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

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

By the Court.

This is an action of contract for use and occupation of premises owned by the plaintiffs. The view of the record most favorable to the defendant is that there was conflicting evidence whether the defendant had given notice to end the tenancy, whether the plaintiffs had waived the statutory notice of intention to terminate the tenancy by the defendant, and whether the plaintiffs had accepted a surrender of the premises and agreed not to hold the defendant responsible for more rent. All these issues of fact were decided against the defendant. They were pure questions of fact. The requests for rulings all were denied rightly on the ground that they were not applicable to the facts found. No question of law is presented'by the appeal.

This appeal is within the terms of R. L. c. 156, § 13. The order of the Appellate Division dismissing the report is affirmed and, from the time when the appeal was taken, double costs are awarded against the defendant and interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum on the amount found due for debt.

So ordered.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →
1923: 11931: 11932: 11935: 11938: 11940: 11942: 11944: 11946: 11995: 41997: 119232026peak 1995 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Procacci Commercial Realty v. DHRS690 So. 2d 603 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
  2. Morrone v. STATE FARM FIRE & CAS. INS.664 So. 2d 972 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  3. Brahmbhatt v. Allstate Indemnity Co.655 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  4. Brahmbhatt v. Allstate Indemnity Co.652 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  5. Marrone v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance655 So. 2d 146 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  6. Conklin v. Kansas City Public Service Co.41 S.W.2d 608 (Mo. Ct. App. 1931)

Most recent

  1. Procacci Commercial Realty v. DHRS690 So. 2d 603 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
  2. Morrone v. STATE FARM FIRE & CAS. INS.664 So. 2d 972 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  3. Brahmbhatt v. Allstate Indemnity Co.655 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  4. Marrone v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance655 So. 2d 146 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  5. Brahmbhatt v. Allstate Indemnity Co.652 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
  6. Hill v. Liberty Motor & Engineering Corp.45 A.2d 467 (Md. 1946)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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