City of Medford v. Metropolitan District Commission
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtLummtjs, J.
The defendants, constituting the metropolitan district commission, have the care of a boulevard laid out under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 92, §§ 35-37, called the Fells-way, which runs through the plaintiff cities. The bills allege that the defendants are cutting down shade trees in the boulevard, and pray for an injunction restraining further cutting. Demurrers for want of equity were sustained, and the cases were reported.
A boulevard, unlike a roadway in a “reservation” under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 92, § 33, is a public way. Burke v. Metropolitan District Commission, 262 Mass. 70, 72, 73. It is not a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Donohue v. City of NewburyportMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Dealtry v. Selectmen of WatertownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
- Burke v. Metropolitan District CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
- Mayor of Cambridge v. DeanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Valvoline Oil Co. v. Inhabitants of WinthropMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Marshall v. Registrar of Motor VehiclesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
- Matek v. MatekMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Nabhan v. Board of Selectmen of SalisburyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981