Legal Opinion

George v. Goldman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 1, 1956PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCounihan, J.

The finding of a judge in this action of contract tried in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston was for the plaintiff. A report to the Appellate Division was dismissed and the defendants appealed. The action is based upon a contract whereby the plaintiff agreed to build a dwelling house in Boston for the defendants and the plaintiff seeks to recover an unpaid balance on said contract.

The defendants claim to be aggrieved by the action of the judge denying several of their requests for rulings and allowing several of the plaintiff’s requests. The only request which we deem necessary to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Abrams v. Factory Mutual Liability InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Pearson v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  3. Waldo Bros. v. Platt Contracting Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Klein v. CatalanoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  2. Crabb v. Swindler, AdministratrixSupreme Court of Kansas · 1959
  3. Ricky Smith Pontiac, Inc. v. Subaru of New England, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
  4. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co. of Anchorage, Inc. v. Superior Burner Service Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Albrecht v. CliffordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002

15 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