Home/Massachusetts Appeals Court/Haddad v. Board of Appeals

Haddad v. Board of Appeals

355 N.E.2d 492, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 843
Massachusetts Appeals Court·Decided October 14, 1976·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

It is impossible to give intelligent consideration to any of the plaintiffs’ contentions without (a) the trial transcript and (b) the unanswered demands for admissions of fact which the judge made parts of his findings. None of that material has been reproduced in the plaintiffs’ appendix, and “we see no occasion to send for the original papers in order to discover whether there is any merit to the ... [plaintiffs’] contentions.” Slater v. Burnham Corp. ante, 791 (1976). See also Storer v. Anderson, ante, 809 (1976).

Judgment affirmed.

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

Haddad v. Board of Appeals, 355 N.E.2d 492, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 843 (Mass. Ct. App. 1976).

355 N.E.2d 492 (Haddad v. Board of Appeals) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kunen v. First Agricultural National Bank
382 N.E.2d 750 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1978)
Ford Marketing Corp. v. Hartford Insurance
369 N.E.2d 472 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
B. P. W. Plastics Corp. v. Massachusetts Electric Co.
368 N.E.2d 830 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
White v. Burger
368 N.E.2d 824 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Donoghue v. Donoghue
368 N.E.2d 818 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Svenson v. First National Bank of Boston
363 N.E.2d 1129 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Cambridgeport Savings Bank v. Binns
360 N.E.2d 1072 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Kipp v. O'Reilly
360 N.E.2d 907 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Woodward v. School Committee of Sharon
359 N.E.2d 966 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. v. Healy Corp.
359 N.E.2d 634 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)