Board of Selectmen of Brewster v. Sparrow
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
Even after argument we do not know why the selectmen or their counsel thought it necessary to bring the present separate action (No. 38792) in order to establish their standing to contest the titles of the present defendants to the parcels which are designated as “Owners Unknown” in the 1970 order of taking and which are supposedly involved in the original action (No. 35287). We do know that the judgment in the present action is in error because the selectmen do have standing to contest the titles to the parcels in dispute (see Prentice v. Worcester, 129 Mass. 559, 568 [1880]; Emery v. Boston…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Emery v. Boston Terminal Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Forster v. ForsterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Whitehouse v. Town of SherbornMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
- George A. Fuller Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Willar v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eldredge v. Board of SelectmenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984