Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

157 Mass. 556

Hobbs v. Hill

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 4, 1893

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1893-01-04

Tort, for assault and battery. The defendant pleaded justification as a duly qualified police officer, and recited in his answer “ that the plaintiff was arrested by the defendant on October 10, 1890, for being intoxicated and committing a breach of the peace in a public place, . . . and the plaintiff, having been arrested by the defendant as aforesaid, assaulted the defendant with a weapon dangerous to life.” The arrest was without a warrant.

Relies on Conant v. Burnham

Cited in Black's (1910)’s definition of “Complaint” · Black's (1910)’s definition of “Cross-complaint”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1893-01-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 2003

1 district · 5 state decisions

30189319001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 →

Allen, J.

¶1The word “ complaint,” as used in the statutes of this Commonwealth in reference to criminal offences, sometimes means the formal written charge of crime to which the accused person is to answer, and sometimes it means the oral charge which may be made to a proper magistrate or court, and which is to be reduced to writing by the magistrate or court. It is used in the latter sense in Pub. Sts. c. 207, § 25. The officer may make the arrest without a warrant, and, after the person arrested is so far recovered from his intoxication as to render it proper to carry him before a court or trial justice, the officer is to make a complaint against him for the crime of drunkenness. By Pub. Sts. c. 212, § 15, “ Upon complaint made to any such magistrate that a criminal offence has been committed, he shall examine on oath the complainant and any witnesses produced by him, shall reduce the complaint to writing,” etc. A similar use of the word “ complaint,” as signifying merely an oral charge, which is to be reduced to writing by the magistrate or court, is found in *558Pub. Sts. c. 211, § 2, and also in c. 89, § 18. It was not necessary for the defendant to make his complaint in writing, and the plaintiff’s request for instructions was properly refused. Conant v. Burnham, 133 Mass. 503. Smith v. Hayden, 6 Cush. 111.

¶2Exceptions overruled.

/157/mass/556 · .json · Public domain