Legal Opinion

Connolly v. Kilcourse

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 15, 1934PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWait, J.

This is an action of contract for rent. The answer is a general denial. The defence is that the plaintiff does not have title to the premises. There is no dispute that the plaintiff rented the premises to the defendant on July 25, 1932, at $35 a month, to begin August 1, 1932, payable on the fifteenth day of each month. The defendant took possession on July 26, 1932. He has since held possession. On August 1, 1932, a mortgagee made formal entry for possession for breach of condition and for purposes of foreclosure. The plaintiff on August 3, 1932, made a formal entry under a tax title. August…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Magaw v. BealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Lamson & Co. v. AbramsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  2. Connors v. WickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
  3. Whitlock v. Max Goodman & Sons Realty, Inc. (In Re Goodman Industries, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 1982
  4. Markey v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  5. In Re T.H.B. Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 1988

10 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