Legal Opinion

Gifford v. Mercantile Wharf Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 28, 1969PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In this action of contract demurrers were sustained to the declaration and to the amended declaration. The plaintiff appealed from each ruling. The plaintiff, a tenant at will of the defendant’s premises, made improvements to permit the installation of an egg processing machine and refrigeration plant which were wrought into the real estate. The Boston Redevelopment Authority took the premises by eminent domain, and paid the defendant a sum in compensation which included the value of the plaintiff’s improvements. The loss of such improvements by a tenant at will is not compensable. Riedel v.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Grandchamp v. CostelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  2. National Overall Dry Cleaning Co. v. YavnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  3. Riedel v. Plymouth Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lewis v. MarshMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  2. Loring Studios of Massachusetts, Inc. v. ScheftMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
  3. Caruso v. Robert D. Murgia & Co.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API