Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc. v. Silvia

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc. v. Silvia

1994 Mass. App. Div. 159, 1994 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 67

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedAugust 11, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 1994 Mass. App. Div. 159 (Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc. v. Silvia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc. v. Silvia, 1994 Mass. App. Div. 159, 1994 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 67 (Mass. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Dolan, P.J.

This case is before us on an agreed statement of facts. As such, we are in the same position as was the trial judge who received no evidence and saw and heard no witnesses. Hickey v. Green, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 671 (1982). We agree with the trial judge who found for the defendant, and we dismiss this appeal.

The agreed statement of facts indicates that plaintiff and one Louis Petrozzi (‘Petrozzi”) entered into an agreement under the terms of which plaintiff would prepare a preliminary subdivision and topographic survey for land owned by defendant. Defendant was not a party to this agreement At that time, although the land was not owned by Petrozzi, it was subject to a purchase and sale agreement between Petrozzi and defendant. After plaintiff performed services, Petrozzi apparently defaulted on his obligation to purchase the land. Plaintiff has an unsatisfied judgment against Petrozzi and now seeks to recover payment for its services from defendant

No written or oral contract exists between plaintiff and defendant. There is nothing in the agreed statement of facts that indicates defendant received a benefit from plaintiff’s services, or that either plaintiff or defendant expected that defendant would pay plaintiff for its services. Plaintiff has never billed or invoiced defendant for its services. In short, the agreed facts disclose no basis for liability to be imposed on defendant.

Report dismissed.

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

Dolan, P.J.

This case is before us on an agreed statement of facts. As such, we are in the same position as was the trial judge who received no evidence and saw and heard no witnesses. Hickey v. Green, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 671 (1982). We agree with the trial judge who found for the defendant, and we dismiss this appeal.

The agreed statement of facts indicates that plaintiff and one Louis Petrozzi (‘Petrozzi”) entered into an agreement under the terms of which plaintiff would prepare a preliminary subdivision and topographic survey for land owned by defendant. Defendant was not a party to this agreement At that time, although the land was not owned by Petrozzi, it was subject to a purchase and sale agreement between Petrozzi and defendant. After plaintiff performed services, Petrozzi apparently defaulted on his obligation to purchase the land. Plaintiff has an unsatisfied judgment against Petrozzi and now seeks to recover payment for its services from defendant

No written or oral contract exists between plaintiff and defendant. There is nothing in the agreed statement of facts that indicates defendant received a benefit from plaintiff’s services, or that either plaintiff or defendant expected that defendant would pay plaintiff for its services. Plaintiff has never billed or invoiced defendant for its services. In short, the agreed facts disclose no basis for liability to be imposed on defendant.

Report dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1994 Mass. App. Div. 159, 1994 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayward-boynton-williams-inc-v-silvia-massdistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack