Legal Opinion

McParland v. Rosencranz

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided October 31, 1989PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSilva, J.

The appellate route traveled by this case was one in which the toll booth was successfully avoided. Judgment entered against the defendant on the plaintiff’s claim for services as an expert witness. Special findings of fact were made and the defendant’s requests for rulings were acted on. Claiming to be aggrieved by the court’s denial of certain numbered requests, the defendant claimed a report. On January 4,1989 the court forwarded a copy of the report, as settled, to the defendant and filed a copy with the clerk’s office.

This notice to the parties and the filing of the report with the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fortier v. Coady Corp.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1984
  2. Friedman v. CharlesMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1983
  3. Entis v. Brookline Rent Control BoardMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1986

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Transamerica Insurance Finance Corp. v. Watson Insurance Agency, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API