Legal Opinion
MacIuca v. Papit
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided November 15, 1991No. 90-P-667PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGillerman, J.
After the defendant’s appeal from an adverse money judgment had been dismissed for failure to comply with the provisions of rule 30 of the General Rules of the Probate Court (rule 30), 1 the trial judge granted the defend ant’s motion to “perfect” his appeal by revoking the dismissal. The plaintiff has appealed from that order; she argues that the judge lacked authority to reinstate an appeal properly dismissed under that rule. We agree.
The facts are not in dispute. On June 3, 1988, the plaintiff filed an action to recover monies claimed to be due as a result of various real estate…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Schulte v. Director of the Division of Employment SecurityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Dickerson v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Goldstein v. BarronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Mailer v. MailerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Catalano v. First Essex Savings BankMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1994
- Georgantis v. Star Market CompaniesMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2000
- Suominen v. Goodman Industrial Equities Management Group, LLCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- Associated Chiropractic Services, Inc. v. Travelers InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1998
- Crystal Construction Corp. v. HartiganMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.