¶1Order dismissing report affirmed. This is an action of tort in which the plaintiff seeks to recover for property damage alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant in colliding with the plaintiff’s automobile from behind. Upon undisputed evidence the judge found for the defendant. The plaintiff claimed a report to the Appellate Division which was dismissed, and the plaintiff appealed. The sole question argued was the failure of the judge to act upon certain requests filed by the defendant. The plaintiff filed *769no requests and claimed no exceptions. Since the judge took no action upon the defendant’s requests, they must be treated as having been denied, Mitchell v. Silverstein, 323 Mass. 239, 240-241. Alves v. Boulanger, 329 Mass. 766. The denial of the defendant’s requests in no way harmed the plaintiff. Their denial was not inconsistent with a general finding for the defendant. Godfrey v. Caswell, 321 Mass. 161, 162. Apparently the only grievance the plaintiff has is that the judge made a general finding for the defendant. This presents no question of law and is not reviewable by the Appellate Division. Muir Brothers Co. v. Sawyer Construction Co. 328 Mass. 413, 414-415.
333 Mass. 768
Chadwick v. Desroches
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided November 30, 1955
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1955-11-30
Relies on Godfrey v. Caswell · Muir Brothers Co. v. Sawyer Construction Co. · Mitchell v. Silverstein
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1955-11-30
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2010
18 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 →