Legal Opinion

Callahan v. Goldman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 13, 1913PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.

This is an action (between the parties to the action of tort, ante, 234) for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment implied in the lease of June, 1907.

After the defendant succeeded to the reversion on July 8, 1907, it was found that the plaintiff’s bowling alleys and the whole basement were flooded with water. There was evidence that this water came from leaking conductors and a leaky roof in that part of the building not covered by the lease to the plaintiff.

At the trial in the Superior Court the judge * "refused to direct *239a verdict for the defendant, and the case is here on an exception…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lumiansky v. TessierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  2. Boreel v. . LawtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  3. Royce v. GuggenheimMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  4. Taylor v. FinniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  5. Skally v. ShutsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Charles E. Burt, Inc. v. Seven Grand Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  2. Winchester v. O'BrienMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  3. Stone v. SullivanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  4. Shindler v. MildenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  5. Rome v. JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931

8 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