Legal Opinion

Devine v. Town of Saugus

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided November 3, 1977PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1. The merits of this case were properly decided for the reasons carefully articulated in the comprehensive decision of the *886judge of the Land Court to whom the case was submitted on what amounted to a case stated. 2. The petitioner Devine is the freehold owner in possession of the locus, and there can be no question that the Land Court had jurisdiction trader G. L. c. 240, § 14A, and G. L. c. 185, § 1 (j1/2), to grant all the declaratory relief requested by her. Pitman v. Medford, 312 Mass. 618, 618-622 (1942). Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. v. Reading, 354 Mass. 181, 183-185 (1968). Harrison…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Save the Bay, Inc. v. Department of Public UtilitiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Pitman v. City of MedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  3. Wishnewsky v. Town of SaugusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  4. Harrison v. Town of BraintreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
  5. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. v. Town of ReadingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Snow v. E. L. Dauphinais, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
  2. McCabe v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API