Marchesi v. Brabant

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Marchesi v. Brabant

155 N.E.2d 808, 338 Mass. 790, 1959 Mass. LEXIS 887

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJanuary 28, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 155 N.E.2d 808 (Marchesi v. Brabant) 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

Marchesi v. Brabant, 155 N.E.2d 808, 338 Mass. 790, 1959 Mass. LEXIS 887 (Mass. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Exceptions overruled. In this action of summary process which was tried before a judge of the Superior Court, the judge made findings of fact and found for the plaintiff. The defendant presented three requests which in effect asked the judge to rule that a finding for the defendant was required.. These requests [791]*791were denied. Exceptions to their denial and to the finding for the plaintiff bring the case here. The sole question is whether a memorandum executed by the parties in the latter part of December, 1955, constituted a lease. The parties agree that if it is a lease the defendant should prevail, and that if it is not, the plaintiff should prevail. The judge ruled that the memorandum was not a lease and at most was an agreement to execute a lease at some future time. There was no error. The memorandum contained no date for the commencement or termination of the occupancy, and, as the judge found, there was “no evidence from which either of those dates can reasonably and precisely be found.” “The duration of a lease for years must be certain; this includes both its commencement and termination.” Murray v. Cherrington, 99 Mass. 229, 230. See Farris v. Hershfield, 325 Mass. 176.

Richard C. Johnson, for the defendant. Robert J. Muldoon, for the plaintiff.

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

Exceptions overruled. In this action of summary process which was tried before a judge of the Superior Court, the judge made findings of fact and found for the plaintiff. The defendant presented three requests which in effect asked the judge to rule that a finding for the defendant was required.. These requests [791]*791were denied. Exceptions to their denial and to the finding for the plaintiff bring the case here. The sole question is whether a memorandum executed by the parties in the latter part of December, 1955, constituted a lease. The parties agree that if it is a lease the defendant should prevail, and that if it is not, the plaintiff should prevail. The judge ruled that the memorandum was not a lease and at most was an agreement to execute a lease at some future time. There was no error. The memorandum contained no date for the commencement or termination of the occupancy, and, as the judge found, there was “no evidence from which either of those dates can reasonably and precisely be found.” “The duration of a lease for years must be certain; this includes both its commencement and termination.” Murray v. Cherrington, 99 Mass. 229, 230. See Farris v. Hershfield, 325 Mass. 176.

Richard C. Johnson, for the defendant. Robert J. Muldoon, for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 N.E.2d 808, 338 Mass. 790, 1959 Mass. LEXIS 887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marchesi-v-brabant-mass-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack