Legal Opinion

Pongonis v. Saab

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 11, 1985PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In this case Pongonis alleges that, by reason of the negligence of Saab (an attorney), Pongonis realized only $3,000 cash in settlement of a contract action which had a value many times greater than this figure to Pongonis. At the close of Pongonis’ evidence before a Superior Court jury, the judge allowed Saab’s motion for a directed verdict. Pongonis appealed and this court ordered direct review on its own motion. Both parties have argued, we think correctly, that the precise issue is whether Pongonis’ case was fatally deficient because no expert testimony was adduced on the issue of Saab’s…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Brown v. GersteinMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
  2. Glidden v. TerranovaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
  3. McLellan v. FullerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  4. Fall River Savings Bank v. CallahanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
  5. Gilbert v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Wagenmann v. AdamsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
  2. Rizzo v. HainesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  3. Herbert A. Sullivan, Inc. v. Utica Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
  4. Leahy v. Local 1526, American Federation of State, County, & Municipal EmployeesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  5. Colucci v. Rosen, Goldberg, Slavet, Levenson & Wekstein, P.C.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1987

38 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