Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

142 Mass. 96

Andrews v. Cassidy

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1886-06-28

Petition alleging that the petitioners were copartners having their usual place of business in Boston; that on June 26, 1885, they duly recovered judgment against G. I. Robbins, of said Boston, in the Municipal Court of the city of Boston, on which execution duly issued on June 30 ; that, after all due and proper proceedings on the same, said Robbins duly appeared before William E. Cassidy, a commissioner in insolvency within and for said county, for the purpose of taking…

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 1944

1 state decisions

Cited in Anderson (1889)’s definition of “Pension”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1886-06-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

C. Allen, J.

¶1The only question is whether, within the meaning of the Pub. Sts. c. lj?2, § 49, the examination of the debtor must be treated as pending up to the time of the announcement of the decision of the magistrate, so that the creditor was at liberty to file charges of fraud at any time before the announcement of the decision, although the hearing of evidence and arguments had closed, and the magistrate had continued the cause for the purpose of considering the questions of law and fact involved therein. And we are of the opinion that such an examination is still pending, until the announcement of the decision. Until then, the cause might have been reopened in the discretion of the magistrate, and further evidence or arguments heard.

¶2Mandamus to issue.

/142/mass/96 · .json · Public domain