Legal Opinion

Piepul v. Bryson

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided December 26, 1996No. 95-P-1542PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Before the Superior Court lowered on the plaintiff the boom of a final judgment under Mass.R.Civ.P. 33(a), 368 Mass. 906 (1976), slightly more than five months had elapsed since service on the plaintiff of interrogatories by the defendants. When plaintiff’s counsel received notice of the entry of final judgment, he then acted with relative alacrity and, within two weeks, filed a motion to vacate judgment, accompanied by answers to the defendants’ interrogatories. The Superior Court judge, on the basis of the criteria discussed in Berube v. McKesson Wine & Spirits Co., 7 Mass. App. Ct. 426,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Berube v. McKesson Wine & Spirits Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  2. Greenleaf v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Kalenderian v. MardenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1999
  2. Carlson v. SilviaMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2002
  3. Andre v. Safety InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2003
  4. Chawla v. J & L Musto Construction, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2003
  5. Lucas v. LeblancMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2004

2 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