Legal Opinion
Town of Norwood v. Adams-Russell Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided February 8, 1990PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.
In July, 1982, the town of Norwood granted a license to Adams-Russell Co., Inc. (Adams-Russell), authorizing it to construct and operate a cable television system in the town. That license, which took the form of a bilaterally negotiated contract, contains a rate freeze provision providing as follows: “The Licensee [Adams-Russell] agrees that it will not change the schedule of monthly rates for all cable and pay TV services for at least twenty-four (24) months after the cable system is initially fully constructed and energized.”2
The event underlying the town’s complaint in this case occurred…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Jones v. Rath Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- City of New York v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Nashoba Communications Limited Partnership No. 7, D/B/A Nashoba Cable Services v. Town of Danvers, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- Town of Norwood v. Adams-Russell Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988
- United States v. Roger Morin, A/K/A Paris VideoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Morrison v. Viacom, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Watermark LLC v. R H Benea Cranberry Co., Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2026