Legal Opinion
Lynch v. Andrew
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided August 19, 1985PublishedCited by 53 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.
At the behest of the buyers’ lawyer, a mortgage financing condition was added to a purchase and sale agreement prepared on a printed form published by the Greater Boston Real Estate Board. Claiming inability to secure mortgage financing, the buyers, the plaintiffs in this action, say they were excused from performance and demand recovery of the $25,400 deposit which they made under that agreement.
The text of the financing clause is as follows: “Buyer shall apply to a conventional bank or other mortgage loan institution for a loan of [$155,000] payable in not less than thirty . . . years at…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- A-Z Servicenter, Inc. v. SegallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
- Kroeger v. Stop & Shop Companies, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
- Stabile v. McCarthyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1957
- Guerin v. StacyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Capezzuto v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by53 opinions
- Kelly v. MarxMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
- Space Master International, Inc. v. City of WorcesterCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Kunelius v. Town of StowCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009
- TAL Financial Corp. v. CSC Consulting, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
- Baybank Middlesex v. 1200 Beacon Properties, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.