John McCourt Co. v. Singarella

I cannot agree with the decision of the majority in this case, and feel constrained to express my reasons for dissent.

I believe the trial judge correctly ruled in effect that there was evidence to warrant a finding for the plaintiff; that he may have given the wrong reasons, to wit: agency, simply constitutes non-prejudicial error.

"It is of no consequence whether the reason on which the trial court proceeded was sound; the result will be upheld when not tainted by any harmful error.” Boston Morris Plan Co. v. Barrett, 272 Mass. 487, 491.

Robert Sullivan, for the plaintiff. William L. Schell,…