Legal Opinion

Kansky v. Harrison

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided October 4, 1985Published

1Opinion of the CourtStaff, J.

This is an action of contract in which the plaintiff seeks to recover $11,885.87 for legal services rendered to the defendant. The defendant filed an answer pro se admitting that she owed the plaintiff $3,300 but not the amount claimed by the plaintiff. Plaintiff filed interrogatories which defendant did not timely answer. Utilizing the summary procedure provided in Dist./Mun. Cts. R. Civ. P., Rule 33, the plaintiff made application for judgment and in due course, the clerk entered judgment for the plaintiff in the amount alleged in the complaint as being due.

The defendant eventually engaged…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Davis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  2. International Fidelity Insurance v. WilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  3. Berube v. McKesson Wine & Spirits Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  4. Cummings v. National Shawmut Bank of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  5. Plasko v. OrserMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API