Ryan v. City of Marlborough
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtDolan, J.
This action of contract by a member of the police force of the defendant city is brought to recover $291.50, representing pay for fifty-three days during which the plaintiff was absent from duty in the year 1943. The case was heard by the judge sitting without a jury. He found for the defendant, and the case comes before us on the plaintiff’s exceptions to the denial of certain of his requests for rulings.
Material facts are these: The defendant was incorporated as a city under the provisions of St. 1890, c. 320. In 1895 the city council adopted an ordinance (c. 36) relative to the *611salaries…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Brooks v. Fitchburg & Leominster Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Commonwealth v. BloombergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Commonwealth v. SlocumMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Commonwealth v. O'NeilMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Benedict v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- BOSTON POLICE PATROLMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC. v. BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Quinlan v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Haines v. Town Manager of MansfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Yetman v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
- Borough of Jamesburg v. HubbsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.