History
  • No items yet
midpage
Commonwealth v. Hendrie
68 Mass. 503
Mass.
1854
Check Treatment
By the Court.

This objection is founded on the rule that the name of the party, to whom the sale was made, must be stated, if known. It is, however, perfectly well settled that the name, if not known, need not be stated. It is supposed by the defendant that there is an inconsistency between the allegation and the proof. But there is no inconsistency; it is a question of time, a question of tense, grammatically speaking. The complainant may not have known who the person was to whom the sale was made, until he heard the testimony of Haynes, and this was after the complaint had in fact been made. The case was rightly left to the jury, and with proper instructions.

Exceptions overruled

Case Details

Case Name: Commonwealth v. Hendrie
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Nov 15, 1854
Citation: 68 Mass. 503
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.