Legal Opinion
Meisel Press Manufacturing Co. v. City of Boston
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided July 21, 1930PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSanderson, J.
Seven petitions for land damages were tried together with a stipulation that the entire damages found by the jury in the actions should be entered as the verdict in one of the cases, and that a verdict of $1 should be entered in each of the remaining actions.
The purpose of the takings was to provide for the extension of rapid transit facilities in the Dorchester district of Boston under the provisions of St. 1923, c. 480. The *376petitioner’s land adjoined the location of the main line railroad tracks of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, lessee of the Old Colony Railroad…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Sargent v. Inhabitants of MerrimacMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Opinion of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
- Maynard v. City of NorthamptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Ham v. City of SalemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Burt v. WigglesworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Assessors of Quincy v. Boston Consolidated Gas Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Wine v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Tigar v. Mystic River Bridge AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
- Maher v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Bryne v. City of GloucesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.