Arthur J. Roberts & Co. v. Delfour, Inc.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
1. A violation of Rule 49, § 9, of the Superior Court (1974), does not oust the Superior Court of jurisdiction to handle a matter, and it certainly would not (and did not) preclude that court from proceeding as it did here. The judge had the power (see DeMatteo Constr. Co. v. Board of Appeals of Hingham, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 446, 457 [1975]) to revive or revise the order of reference. The judgment is not defective, and collateral attack in this regard is not availing.
2. The plaintiff questions the adequacy of several of the master’s subsidiary findings, as well as the omission of certain findings…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bills v. NunnoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976
- Miller v. WinshallMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
- M. DeMatteo Construction Co. v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1975
- Mahoney v. MahoneyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1977
- Continental Bronze Co. v. Salvo & Armstrong Steel Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.