Legal Opinion

City of Springfield v. Springfield Street Railway Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 8, 1951PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.

The plaintiff appeals from an interlocutory decree sustaining a demurrer to its bill of complaint and from a final decree dismissing the bill. The final decree contains the phrase, “all parties interested ■ — consenting hereto — in open court.” The parties at the arguments before us agreed that the inclusion of this phrase was in error, and the defendant, with the plaintiff’s assent, has since filed a motion in this court to expunge nunc pro tune. The subject matter of the motion was not brought to the attention of the judge by whose order the final decree was entered. Indeed, it was too late…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Burgess v. Mayor of BrocktonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  2. Eustace v. DickeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  3. Commonwealth v. SlocumMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  4. Gordon v. GuernseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  5. Barrows v. Farnum's Stage Lines, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Goodridge v. Department of Public HealthMassachusetts Superior Court · 2002
  2. Lomberto v. Town of FranklinMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API