Legal Opinion

Eastern Edison Co. v. Barrett

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided June 12, 1986PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCutter, J.

This case is before us on a statement of agreed facts and a report by a Superior Court judge, without decision, see G. L. c. 231, § 111; Mass.R.Civ.P. 64, 365 Mass. 831-832 (1974), of the issue whether the plantiff (Eastern) is entitled to compensation for its costs in making possible the movement of Barrett’s house along a highway in Fall River. Eastern is an electric utility (see G. L. c. 164) which provides electric service in the Fall River area. To move Barrett’s house required that Eastern “de-energize . . . disconnect, remove[,] and replace certain of its high voltage lines (440 volts…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boston Edison Co. v. Board of Selectmen of ConcordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
  2. Casey v. Massachusetts Electric Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
  3. Town of Shrewsbury v. MunroMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1974

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sundquist Homes, Inc. v. Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1Court of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  2. Horgan v. Massachusetts Electric Co.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1992
  3. Sundquist Homes, Inc. v. Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1Court of Appeals of Washington · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API