Legal Opinion

Pistorino & Co. v. Style Leather Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 23, 1972PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCutter, J.

The plaintiff (Pistorino), a licensed cus*465tomhouse broker in Bostón, seeks declaratory relief concerning its right to reimbursement by the defendant (Style), a leather importer in Haverhill, for about $35,000 of additional import duties owed on Style’s account (and liquidated by Pistorino after the initiation of this suit) on goods brought into the United States by Style.1 A Superior Court judge overruled Style’s demurrer and, after hearing, caused a final decree to be entered, declaring that Style must pay to Pistorino $35,169.86 with interest. Style appealed. The facts are stated largely on…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Union Brokerage Co. v. JensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. School Committee of Cambridge v. Superintendent of SchoolsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  3. Nissenberg v. FellemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  4. Berenson v. NirensteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  5. Batista v. NicollsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1954

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Command Communications, Inc. v. Fritz CompaniesColorado Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. Langton v. Secretary of Public SafetyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1994
  3. Lagasse v. LagasseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
  4. Halperson v. HalpersonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  5. Kent v. Board of HealthMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API