Legal Opinion

Thomas v. Christensen

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided July 1, 1981PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDreben, J.

The plaintiff (Thomas) seeks damages for the breach by the defendant William E. Christensen (Christensen) of a written purchase agreement under which Christensen was, it is alleged, obligated to sell his shares of Sancliff, Inc. (Sancliff) to Thomas at book value. 2 On cross motions for summary judgment, supported by affidavits, depositions and other documents, a judge of the Superior Court granted the defendants’ motion. The judge concluded that Thomas’s rights to purchase the stock were “so closely interwoven” with an employment contract between Sancliff and Thomas that the termination of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Robert Industries, Inc. v. SpenceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1973
  3. Boston Edison Co. v. Boston Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
  4. Stop & Shop, Inc. v. GanemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
  5. Leigh v. RuleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. USM Corp. v. Arthur D. Little Systems, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1989
  2. Boston Edison Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, City of Holyoke Gas and Electric Department, IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
  3. Shain Investment Co., Inc. v. CohenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
  4. Boston Helicopter Charter, Inc. v. Agusta Aviation Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
  5. Margret Rey v. Richard G.D. Lafferty, Margret Rey v. Richard G.D. LaffertyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993

23 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