Litton Business Telephone Systems, Inc. v. Schwartz

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Litton Business Telephone Systems, Inc. v. Schwartz

400 N.E.2d 281, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 847, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1018

CourtMassachusetts Appeals Court

DecidedFebruary 19, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 400 N.E.2d 281 (Litton Business Telephone Systems, Inc. v. Schwartz) 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

Litton Business Telephone Systems, Inc. v. Schwartz, 400 N.E.2d 281, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 847, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1018 (Mass. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

The appeal must be dismissed because the judgment entered on November 17,1978, does not dispose of the counterclaim of the individual defendant and there has been no compliance with the requirements of the first sentence of Mass.R.Civ.P. 54(b), 365 Mass. 821 (1974). E.W. Foster Co. v. McLaughlin, 7 Mass. App. Ct. 865 (1979), and cases cited. No final judgment (G. L. c. 231, § 113, as appearing in St. 1973, c. 1114, § 202) is to be entered while the case remains in its present posture unless the judge who entered the orders of December 9, 1977, and October 23, 1978, shall first file with the papers an explanation of his reasons for striking the aforementioned counterclaim and defaulting both defendants rather than imposing one or more of the other sanctions available under Mass.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2), 365 Mass. 798-799 (1974). See Henshaw v. Travelers Ins. Co., 377 Mass. 910, 911 (1979).

Appeal dismissed

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

The appeal must be dismissed because the judgment entered on November 17,1978, does not dispose of the counterclaim of the individual defendant and there has been no compliance with the requirements of the first sentence of Mass.R.Civ.P. 54(b), 365 Mass. 821 (1974). E.W. Foster Co. v. McLaughlin, 7 Mass. App. Ct. 865 (1979), and cases cited. No final judgment (G. L. c. 231, § 113, as appearing in St. 1973, c. 1114, § 202) is to be entered while the case remains in its present posture unless the judge who entered the orders of December 9, 1977, and October 23, 1978, shall first file with the papers an explanation of his reasons for striking the aforementioned counterclaim and defaulting both defendants rather than imposing one or more of the other sanctions available under Mass.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2), 365 Mass. 798-799 (1974). See Henshaw v. Travelers Ins. Co., 377 Mass. 910, 911 (1979).

Appeal dismissed

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

400 N.E.2d 281, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 847, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/litton-business-telephone-systems-inc-v-schwartz-massappct-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack