Case ID: mass_121/html/0550-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Thomas Conly vs. Michael Conly.
    Middlesex.
    January 9. —10, 1877.
    Colt & Ames, JJ., absent.
    Under the Gen. Sts. c. 127, § 1, an action for malicious prosecution does not survive.
    Tort for malicious prosecution. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., the jury found for the defendant, and the plaintiff alleged exceptions to certain rulings of the judge. The defendant afterwards died, and his administratrix appeared and moved to dismiss the action, on the ground that it did not survive.
    
      J. H. Butler, for the administratrix.
    
      W. P. Harding £ A. V. Lynde, for the plaintiff-
   By the Court.

It is useless to consider the merits of the plaintiff’s exceptions, because, if they should be sustained, the action could not be further prosecuted, having been abated by the defendant’s death since the exceptions were allowed. Gen. Sts. e. 127, § 1. Nettleton v. Dinehart, 5 Cush. 543. Cummings v. Bird, 115 Mass. 346. Action dismissed.