Cusack v. Cusack

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Cusack v. Cusack

5 Mass. App. Ct. 898

DecidedDecember 6, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Mass. App. Ct. 898 (Cusack v. Cusack) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cusack v. Cusack, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 898 (Mass. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

The motion of James J. Cusack to dismiss the appeals of Catherine Cusack in these four cases¹ is allowed, both for the reason stated in the motion and for the additional reason that the records were not in fact assembled within the forty-day period allowed by Mass.R.A.P. 9(c), 365 Mass. 852 (1974), notwithstanding the register’s premature notice to that effect, because the transcript was not filed within that time or any extension thereof. Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co. v. Healy Corp. ante, 43, 56-57, 60-61, 62 (1977).

Appeals dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The motion of James J. Cusack to dismiss the appeals of Catherine Cusack in these four cases¹ is allowed, both for the reason stated in the motion and for the additional reason that the records were not in fact assembled within the forty-day period allowed by Mass.R.A.P. 9(c), 365 Mass. 852 (1974), notwithstanding the register’s premature notice to that effect, because the transcript was not filed within that time or any extension thereof. Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co. v. Healy Corp. ante, 43, 56-57, 60-61, 62 (1977).

Appeals dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Mass. App. Ct. 898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cusack-v-cusack-massappct-1977.