Legal Opinion

Stancioff v. Hertz

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided July 22, 1980PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

About six months after an arbitrator had made an award, the plaintiff applied to the Superior Court for confirmation. A judgment was entered confirming the award and ordering the defendant to pay damages in the amount determined by it. The defendant made no application to vacate or modify the award. See G. L. c. 251, §§ 12 and 13, as amended by St. 1972, c. 200, §§ 1 and 2. The defendant has appealed from that judgment and argues two issues.

1. There was a dispute between the parties as to whether the locale of the arbitration was to be Boston or New York, Rule 11 of the Construction Industry…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Trustees of Boston & Maine Corp. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1973

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Tri-City Construction Co. v. MarshMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Chicago Southshore & South Bend Railroad v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Baxter Health Care, Corp. v. Harvard Apparatus, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
  4. Bernard v. Hemisphere Hotel Management, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
  5. L. R. Foy Construction Co. v. Dean L. Dauley & Waldorf AssociatesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1982

5 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