Legal Opinion

Structural Systems, Inc. v. Siegel

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided June 3, 1975PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

These cross actions arose from a contract between Structural Systems, Inc. (Structural) and David Siegel (Siegel) in which Structural agreed to deliver steel joists and decking to Siegel for $54,000. Structural claimed that Siegel owed it money for steel delivered, while Siegel claimed that certain deliveries were never made, that nothing was owed to Structural until delivery was complete, and that damages were due from Structural because of its delay and failure to deliver all of the steel. An auditor heard Structural’s, but not Siegel’s, claim and his report was submitted to the jury before…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Flint v. CodmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
  2. Malden Knitting Mills v. United States Rubber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  3. Taylor v. HarringtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  4. Chadwick & Carr Co. v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  5. Chronopoulos v. Gil Wyner Co. Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Duarte v. Town of FairhavenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
  2. Gladstone Bros. v. Board of HealthMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API