Legal Opinion

Seymour's Case

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided October 24, 1978PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1. The insurer is correct in contending that the judgment, which was entered by a District Court judge sitting by designation in the Superior Court, whereby the findings and decision of the reviewing board were "[r]e-versed” and the case "recommitted” to the reviewing board for the entry of a decision "pursuant” to that of the single member, was not in proper form. Johnson’s Case, 242 Mass. 489, 493-495 (1922). Webb’s Case, 318 Mass. 357, 358-359 (1945). Indeed, the language of recommittal employed by the judge suggests that it might not be a final judgment at all, but merely an interlocutory…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Foreign Auto Import, Inc. v. Renault Northeast, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Johnson's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  3. Chapman's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  4. Roney's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  5. Webb's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Geryk v. Zoning Appeals Board of EasthamptonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  2. In the Matter of MoeMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
  3. Biagini's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  4. Carnute's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
  5. Moog v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1997

3 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