Case Name: Patrick H. Cooney vs. William L. Burt
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1878-01-10
Citations: 123 Mass. 579
Docket Number: 
Parties: Patrick H. Cooney vs. William L. Burt.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 123
Pages: 579–580

Head Matter:
Patrick H. Cooney vs. William L. Burt.
Middlesex.
January 9. —10, 1878.
Ames & Loud, JJ., absent.
H the time for the filing and presentment of exceptions has been extended, under the Gen. Sts. c. 115, § 7, by the presiding judge, to a particular day, and this day is a legal holiday, and the excepting party fails to present them until the next day, the exceptions will be dismissed, if the adverse party takes the objection before the allowance of the exceptions.
Motion to dismiss the defendant’s bill of exceptions to rulings of Pitman, J., at a trial in the Superior Court, at March term 1877. The certificate of the judge upon the bill of exceptions was as follows:
“ The foregoing bill of exceptions has been examined and found conformable to the truth, and I allow the same, subject to the opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court upon the question of law arising upon these facts: The verdict was rendered April 4, and the time for filing and presentment of these exceptions was extended by the court to April 12. Before the said time expired the exceptions were duly filed with the clerk. The last day of said extended time was the day of the annual Fast. The presentment to the court, that is, to the undersigned, the presiding justice thereof, was not made until the day thereafter, and on this ground the plaintiff objected to the allowance thereof.”
S. W. Bragg, for the plaintiff.
0. 8. Lincoln, for the defendant.

Opinion:
Gray, C. J.
The question presented does not depend upon the rules which govern the computation of time when the last of a certain number of days allowed by statute or by general rule of court happens to fall on a Sunday or other legal holiday; but upon the construction of the special order made by the judge in this case, which did not define the time by the number of days, but by a particular date, and, as stated in his certificate, was that " the time for filing and presentment of these exceptions was extended by the court to April 12," and clearly did not allow them to be presented to him after that day. The plaintiff, having taken the objection before the allowance of the exceptions, has the right to insist that they were not presented to tne judge, as well as filed with the clerk, within the time limited by the judge's order. Gen. Sts. c. 115, § 7. Doherty v. Lincoln, 114 Mass. 362. Commonwealth v. Greenlaw, 119 Mass. 208. Conway v. Callahan, 121 Mass. 165. Walker v. Moors, 122 Mass. 501. Exceptions dismissed.