Legal Opinion

Wilfert v. Medoff

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided July 1, 1953PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCallan, J.

By this action of contract the plain-tiffs seek to recover for certain interior finish alleg-edly sold and delivered to the defendants. The answer is a general denial and payment.

Evidence was produced at the trial tending to show that the defendants, being husband and wife, lived in the premises known as No. 90 Addington Road, Brookline, title to which premises stood in the name of the defendant, Rose G. Medoff. The de-fendants after deciding to make alterations of the dwelling to accomodate two families had plans and specifications prepared and engaged the partnership concern of one Smith &…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Gordon v. O'BrienMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  2. Byington v. SimpsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
  3. Fry's v. Lexington & Big Sandy RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859
  4. Hannon v. SchwartzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  5. O'Conner v. HurleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Baby Cakes, Inc. v. Mogul Cheese, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1980
  2. Commonwealth v. Boston FoundationMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API