Legal Opinion

Pugatch v. Stoloff

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided October 31, 1996No. 94-P-1044PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

This is a boundary dispute between the owners of two lots in Newton which, although fronting on different streets, share a common rear lot line. A judge in the Superior Court dismissed Pugatch’s contract claim as well as the Stoloffs’ claim to have acquired a substantial part of Pu-gatch’s lot by adverse possession. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

The two lots were held in common ownership as a single lot by the plaintiff’s mother prior to June 27, 1969. The lot was rectangular, fronted on Sun Hill Lane, and had a house, which the Stoloffs now own, at the Sun Hill Lane end of the lot.…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Kendall v. SelvaggioMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  2. Proprietors of the Kennebeck Purchase v. SpringerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
  3. Ottavia v. SavareseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  4. Kershaw v. ZecchiniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1961
  5. Dow v. DowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Barnett v. MyerowMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2019
  2. Gifford v. OtisMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
  3. 243 Colchester Ave v. OconnorVermont Superior Court · 2025
  4. AM Properties, LLC v. J&W Summit Ave, LLCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2017
  5. Clauson v. BanksMassachusetts Superior Court · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API