Legal Opinion
Dealtry v. Selectmen of Watertown
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided March 30, 1932PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSanderson, J.
The plaintiffs are fifteen taxable inhabitants of the town of Watertown. The defendants are the selectmen, superinténdent of streets, engineer, auditor and treasurer of the town, and the John P. Condon Corporation, the contractor. The General Crushed Stone Company, a corporation, was allowed to intervene as a party defendant. The three demurrers filed to the bill and amended bill were sustained on the first and fourth grounds and the questions raised by the demurrers reported to the full court. The demurrers are identical in the statement of the first ground, namely, that the plaintiffs “have…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Prince v. CrockerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Higginson v. Treasurer & School House CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Davis v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Fuller v. Trustees of Deerfield AcademyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
- Reilly v. Selectmen of BlackstoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Lowell v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- Comerford v. MeierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Moskow v. Boston Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
- Commonwealth v. AlbertMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Povey v. School Committee of MedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.