Julius Tofias & Co. v. George

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

Julius Tofias & Co. v. George

54 Mass. App. Dec. 31

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedMarch 5, 1974

DocketNo. 75; No. 44040

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 54 Mass. App. Dec. 31 (Julius Tofias & Co. v. George) 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

Julius Tofias & Co. v. George, 54 Mass. App. Dec. 31 (Mass. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Murphy, P.J.

Pursuant to Rule 30, District Court Rules, 1965, as amended, both parties were notified and a hearing held by this court sitting at Barnstable on January 31, 1974.

The record before us does not contain any draft report to be established. Furthermore, the finding of the judge indicates the last amended report still lacked some material evidence, and the plaintiff was ordered to file another amended report by December 13, 1973 and failed to do so.

Henry N. Frenette, Jr. for Plaintiff Harry J. 0 ’Sullivan for Defendant

The petition to establish a report to an Appellate Division is denied for failing to comply with the rules governing Appellate procedure, more particularly, Rule 28 and Rule 30, District Court Rules, 1965, as amended. See Cook v. Kozlowski, 351 Mass. 708. Lasell v. Director of the Div. of Employment Security, 325 Mass. 23, 25-26. The Connecticut Bank & Trust Co. v. Phaneuf, 37 Mass. App. Dec. 196 and see Peerless Machinery Co. v. Herbits, 46 Mass. App. Dec. 169.

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