Legal Opinion
Berrios v. Perchik
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided June 13, 1985PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The undisputed facts relevant to the rule 56 motion are these. The original action arose out of a July, 1977, automobile accident in Connecticut which involved an automobile driven by the defendant, a Massachusetts resident, and an automobile in which the plaintiff Berrios was a passenger. On or about August 30, 1977, Berrios commenced an action in the Superior Court of Fairfield County, Connecticut, seeking money damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in the accident. On or about September 1,1977, the defendant was served with process in conformity with Connecticut General…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Attorney General v. BaileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Griffin v. GriffinSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Hartley v. VitielloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Shapiro Equipment Corp. v. Morris & Son Construction Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
- Foley v. MatulewiczMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- First National Bank of Houma v. BaileyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1990
- Consumer Product Distributors, Inc. v. ElseidyMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2010
- Tupman Thurlow Co. v. Woolf International Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1997
- Baker Tanks, Inc. v. Construction Management Trust, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2008
- C.F. Trust, Inc. v. PetersonMassachusetts Superior Court · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.