Legal Opinion

Tracy v. Curtis

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided May 31, 1983PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The cases are back here on further appeals by the plaintiffs. See Tracy v. Curtis, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 10 (1980). 1. The derivative action was remanded for the limited purpose of determining whether some portion of the compensation paid or promised to the defendants under their respective employment agreements with Angelo’s represented a quid pro quo for their restricting themselves from participating in real estate activities which would involve leases to competitors of Angelo’s or for their having caused Curtió to grant Angelo’s a right to prevent a grocery type use of Curtlo’s properties.…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Markell v. Sidney B. Pfeifer Foundation, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
  2. Broomfield v. KosowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  3. Samia v. Central Oil Co. of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  4. Stetson v. FrenchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  5. Hawkes v. LackeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Carey's, Inc. v. CareyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API