¶1The bill of exceptions contains no statement of facts proved or evidence introduced at the trial. It does not therefore appear that there was error in any material point prejudicial to the defendant, either in the refusal to give the instructions requested, or in the instructions given. As the parties *234agree that the exceptions were originally drawn in this form, and deliberately adopted, after suggestion had been made that the evidence should be stated and the excepting party had resisted any change in them, the motion for a postponement must be denied, and the Exceptions overruled.
112 Mass. 233
Canfield v. Canfield
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 15, 1873
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1873-09-15
Tort for obstructing a right of way of the plaintiff across a close in New Marlborough. The answer denied that the plaintiff had the alleged right.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1873-09-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1959
4 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →