Kirchner v. City of Pittsfield
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.
The plaintiffs seek to recover from the city the sum of $260.70 under the following circumstances. The plaintiffs executed a deed to the city of the right and easement to build and maintain a sewer on the plaintiffs’ land known as “lot A.” The deed recited that it was given “in consideration of the abatement of all sewer assessments” by the city. This deed had been prepared and submitted to the plaintiffs by “an agent” of the city, and was delivered to and recorded by the city’s department of pubhc works. Thereafter the city built the sewer and made sewer assessments in accordance with the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Wickliffe's Executors v. PrestonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
- Carey v. FitzpatrickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Rosenfeld v. Boston Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Wheatland v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- G. E. Lothrop Theatres Co. v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Meenes v. GoldbergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Spoerl v. Township of PennsaukenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
- Dunne v. City of Fall RiverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
- Mahony v. Board of Assessors of WatertownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
- Chilton Club v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.