Legal Opinion
Foley v. McGonigle
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided April 30, 1975PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant, as the party asserting an easement over the lane in question, had the burden of proving the nature and extent of any such easement. Swensen v. Marino, 306 Mass. 582, 583 (1940). Fortier v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc. 307 Mass. 292, 299 (1940). Goldstein v. Beal, 317 Mass. 750, 757 (1945). The fact that the plaintiff initiated this proceeding for declaratory relief does not shift that burden to him. Stop & Shop, Inc. v. Ganem, 347 Mass. 697, 703-704 (1964). That other persons, not before the court, may also have rights of passage over or own portions of the lane does not prevent the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stop & Shop, Inc. v. GanemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
- Goldstein v. BealMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Swensen v. MarinoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Fortier v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
3Cited by13 opinions
- Adelson v. HananelCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2011
- Malden Mills Industries, Inc. v. Maroun (In Re Malden Mills Industries, Inc.)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the First Circuit · 2004
- Witteveld v. City of HaverhillMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
- Murphy v. DonovanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976
- Taylor v. LassellMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.