Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

112 Mass. 22

Cains v. Tirrell

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1873-03-15

Counts in tort and in contract, for the same cause of action. The defendant filed a declaration in set-off. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., the plaintiffs, before opening the case, stated that they should rely only upon one count in tort, and discontinue as to the other counts. The defendant then stated that he did not wish to be prejudiced in any of his rights, as he had filed and should insist upon a set-off.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1948

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1873-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gray, J.

¶1There was a mistrial of this case. A declaration in set-off having been filed, the plaintiffs could not discontinue without the consent of the defendant. Gen. Sts. e. 130, § 21. If the defendant had not consented to it, there was no valid discontinuance, and the plaintiffs were entitled to proceed on all the counts of their declaration. If the defendant had consented to a discontinuance of the plaintiffs’ counts in contract, he should not have been permitted to introduce evidence of his set-off. It was for the judge before whom the action was tried to determine whether there had or had not been a valid discontinuance. But the rulings at the trial allowed the defendant to affirm the discontinuance so far as it restricted the claim of the plaintiffs, and to re ■ pudiate it so far as it affected his own.

¶2Exceptions sustained.

/112/mass/22 · .json · Public domain