MacNeil Bros. v. State Realty Co. of Boston, Inc.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

MacNeil Bros. v. State Realty Co. of Boston, Inc.

139 N.E.2d 520, 335 Mass. 764, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 705

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJanuary 8, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 N.E.2d 520 (MacNeil Bros. v. State Realty Co. of Boston, 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

MacNeil Bros. v. State Realty Co. of Boston, Inc., 139 N.E.2d 520, 335 Mass. 764, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 705 (Mass. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals dismissed. The plaintiff took appeals in. this action of contract to recover two payments by the defendant from the proceeds of rents collected by it from properties of which it has taken possession in the process of foreclosure of mortgages given by the plaintiff. The- judge after a hearing made findings of fact and sustained the defendant’s answer in abatement. The plaintiff appealed from the sustaining of this answer and later also appealed from the allowance of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the first appeal. In hearing the answer the judge made findings of fact which [765]*765are not a part of the record and presented no question of law decisive of the case and therefore the second appeal was valueless. Norton v. Musterole Co. Inc. 235 Mass. 587. Yoff a v. Shaw, 299 Mass. 516. Murphy v. Board of Public Welfare of Brockton, 312 Mass. 698. Lapan v. Childs, 330 Mass. 451.

Angus M. MacNeil, for the plaintiff. Phillip Cowin, for the defendant.

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

Appeals dismissed. The plaintiff took appeals in. this action of contract to recover two payments by the defendant from the proceeds of rents collected by it from properties of which it has taken possession in the process of foreclosure of mortgages given by the plaintiff. The- judge after a hearing made findings of fact and sustained the defendant’s answer in abatement. The plaintiff appealed from the sustaining of this answer and later also appealed from the allowance of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the first appeal. In hearing the answer the judge made findings of fact which [765]*765are not a part of the record and presented no question of law decisive of the case and therefore the second appeal was valueless. Norton v. Musterole Co. Inc. 235 Mass. 587. Yoff a v. Shaw, 299 Mass. 516. Murphy v. Board of Public Welfare of Brockton, 312 Mass. 698. Lapan v. Childs, 330 Mass. 451.

Angus M. MacNeil, for the plaintiff. Phillip Cowin, for the defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 N.E.2d 520, 335 Mass. 764, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macneil-bros-v-state-realty-co-of-boston-inc-mass-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack