Legal Opinion

Greenberg v. Weisman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided April 3, 1963PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhittemore, J.

The plaintiff in this action of contract had a verdict on an account annexed for painting work and materials supplied to the defendants’ house. These are the defendants’ exceptions to the refusal of the trial judge to direct verdicts for them, to rulings on the evidence, and to the conduct of the trial.

The jury could have found these facts: The plaintiff, a subcontractor, had an oral contract with Miller Construction Co. (Miller) to do the painting work called for by a contract between Miller and the defendants for the construction of the house. The plaintiff, in the period from March to June…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bucholz v. Green Bros. Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  2. Quintin Vespa Co. Inc. v. Construction Service Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
  3. Nevins v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  4. Hughes v. Rendle Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  5. Saba v. CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MonahanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  2. Commonwealth v. HoganMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  3. Commonwealth v. CampbellMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1977
  4. First National Bank of Cape Cod v. North Adams Hoosac Savings BankMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  5. Dyecraftsmen, Inc. v. FeinbergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971

10 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