Legal Opinion

Rubel v. Hayden, Harding & Buchanan, Inc.

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided February 2, 1983PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.

After a jury returned a special verdict which, in effect, found the defendant Hayden, Harding & Buchanan, Inc. (HHB), liable to the plaintiff Rubel for a finder’s fee, a Superior Court judge allowed a motion for judgment for HHB notwithstanding the verdict.

That action of the judge — which we think was right — triggered an appeal by Rubel, although no judgment for the defendant has to date been entered in the Superior Court. Indeed, a judgment does appear on the docket, but it is one for Rubel in the amount of $13,610. Accordingly the ap peal must be dismissed. As the case has been briefed and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hurley v. OrnsteenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  2. Levy v. BendetsonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1978
  3. O'SHAUGHNESSY v. BesseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  4. Kelly v. Citizens Finance Co. of Lowell, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  5. Neilson v. Malcolm Kenneth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939

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

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. McEvoy Travel Bureau, Inc. v. Norton Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
  2. McNamara v. HoneymanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  3. Cambridgeport Savings Bank v. BoersnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  4. Makino, U.S.A., Inc. v. Metlife Capital Credit Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
  5. Tosti v. AyikMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985

49 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