Legal Opinion

Costonis v. Medford Housing Authority

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 30, 1961PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpiegel, J.

In this action of tort or contract the plaintiff seeks to recover a balance of $1,687 under a painting contract made with the defendant (ten per cent of the contract price withheld), and the sum of $4,464 for additional work requested by the defendant.

There are three counts in the plaintiff’s declaration: one in tort for deceit, the second for such balance and for the value of the additional work, and the third on an account annexed. The judge in the Superior Court found for the plaintiff in the sum of $6,701.50, which included interest.

We summarize the facts as favorably for the plaintiff as…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Johnson-Foster Co. v. D'Amore Construction Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Watkins v. Simplex Time Recorder Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  3. Irving v. Goodimate Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  4. Fluet v. McCabeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  5. MacDonald v. GoughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Spence v. Boston Edison Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  2. Seagram Distillers Co. v. Alcoholic Beverages Control CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988
  3. Makino, U.S.A., Inc. v. Metlife Capital Credit Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
  4. Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co. of PennsylvaniaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  5. Perez v. Boston Housing AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980

43 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