136 Mass. 416
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 14, 1884
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1884-01-14
<p>If a writ is served personally upon a defendant, lie is constructively present in court, and a judgment rendered upon his default is not rendered in his absence, within the Gen. Sts. c. 146, § 21, allowing a petition for a review to be filed within one year after he first has notice of a judgment, rendered in his absence and without his knowledge.</p> <p>If the Superior Court grants a petition for a writ of review, which it had no jurisdiction to entertain, an objection to such jurisdiction, taken at the hearing upon the writ, is not too late.</p>
Relies on Santom v. Ballard · Matthewson v. Moulton
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1884-01-14
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 1961
5 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 →
¶1The Superior Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and hear this writ of review. This question was adjudged in the case of Matthewson v. Moulton, 135 Mass. 122, which is decisive of the case at bar. As the court had no jurisdiction of the cause and subject matter, the objection taken at the trial of the writ of review was not too late. Santon, v. Ballard, 133 Mass. 464, and cases cited.
¶2 Writ of review quashed.