Everts v. The Wine Cellar, Inc.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Everts v. The Wine Cellar, Inc.

32 N.E.2d 244, 308 Mass. 599, 1941 Mass. LEXIS 683

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 26, 1941

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 32 N.E.2d 244 (Everts v. The Wine Cellar, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Everts v. The Wine Cellar, Inc., 32 N.E.2d 244, 308 Mass. 599, 1941 Mass. LEXIS 683 (Mass. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree affirmed with costs. The defendant’s illuminated sign is not shown to be a nuisance. If it unlawfully projected towards the street beyond a building line established under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 82, § 37, the remedy must be sought by public authorities rather than by neighboring residents or proprietors. Hagerty v. McGovern, 187 Mass. 479. Mullholland v. State Racing Commission, 295 Mass. 286, 290, 291. Mayor of Cambridge v. Dean, 300 Mass. 174.

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

Decree affirmed with costs. The defendant’s illuminated sign is not shown to be a nuisance. If it unlawfully projected towards the street beyond a building line established under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 82, § 37, the remedy must be sought by public authorities rather than by neighboring residents or proprietors. Hagerty v. McGovern, 187 Mass. 479. Mullholland v. State Racing Commission, 295 Mass. 286, 290, 291. Mayor of Cambridge v. Dean, 300 Mass. 174.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 N.E.2d 244, 308 Mass. 599, 1941 Mass. LEXIS 683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/everts-v-the-wine-cellar-inc-mass-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack