Mariani v. Trustees of Tufts College

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Mariani v. Trustees of Tufts College

306 N.E.2d 833, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 869, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 713

CourtMassachusetts Appeals Court

DecidedFebruary 5, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 306 N.E.2d 833 (Mariani v. Trustees of Tufts College) 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

Mariani v. Trustees of Tufts College, 306 N.E.2d 833, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 869, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 713 (Mass. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

By these proceedings, commenced in 1972, the petitioner seeks a writ of [870]*870mandamus to compel the respondent (1) to readmit the petitioner as a student in the doctoral program of the respondent’s graduate school of arts and sciences and (2) to examine the petitioner on a doctoral thesis submitted by him in 1961. The petitioner has appealed from an order sustaining (without leave to amend) the respondent’s demurrer to the petition. One of the grounds of the demurrer (see Channel Fish Co. Inc. v. Boston Fish Market Corp. 359 Mass. 185, 187 [1971]), is that mandamus does not lie to compel a private institution such as the respondent to perform the acts prayed for in the petition. An examination of the respondent’s charter (St. 1852, c. 141, as from time to time amended), of which we can and do take judicial notice (American Steel & Wire Co. v. Bearse, 194 Mass. 596, 600-601 [1907]; Baizen v. Board of Pub. Works of Everett, ante, 602, 604, n. 5 [1973], and cases cited), discloses that the respondent is a private educational corporation¹ in or in the property of which the petitioner has no rights personal to himself (cf. Moustakis v. Hellenic Orthodox Soc. of Salem & Peabody, 261 Mass. 462, 467-468 [1928]). An examination of the petition in this matter discloses, as the petitioner all but admits in his brief, that the rights here sought to be vindicated are purely private and contractual in nature. Compare Curry v. Lasell Seminary Co. 168 Mass. 7 (1897); Hall v. Mount Ida School for Girls, Inc. 258 Mass. 464 (1927); Hood v. Tabor Academy, 296 Mass. 509 (1937). Mandamus does not lie for the vindication of such rights. Parrotta v. Hederson, 315 Mass. 416, 418-419 (1944).

JohnP. Dowcett forthe petitioner. Michael J. Liston for the respondent.

Order sustaining demurrer affirmed.

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

By these proceedings, commenced in 1972, the petitioner seeks a writ of [870]*870mandamus to compel the respondent (1) to readmit the petitioner as a student in the doctoral program of the respondent’s graduate school of arts and sciences and (2) to examine the petitioner on a doctoral thesis submitted by him in 1961. The petitioner has appealed from an order sustaining (without leave to amend) the respondent’s demurrer to the petition. One of the grounds of the demurrer (see Channel Fish Co. Inc. v. Boston Fish Market Corp. 359 Mass. 185, 187 [1971]), is that mandamus does not lie to compel a private institution such as the respondent to perform the acts prayed for in the petition. An examination of the respondent’s charter (St. 1852, c. 141, as from time to time amended), of which we can and do take judicial notice (American Steel & Wire Co. v. Bearse, 194 Mass. 596, 600-601 [1907]; Baizen v. Board of Pub. Works of Everett, ante, 602, 604, n. 5 [1973], and cases cited), discloses that the respondent is a private educational corporation¹ in or in the property of which the petitioner has no rights personal to himself (cf. Moustakis v. Hellenic Orthodox Soc. of Salem & Peabody, 261 Mass. 462, 467-468 [1928]). An examination of the petition in this matter discloses, as the petitioner all but admits in his brief, that the rights here sought to be vindicated are purely private and contractual in nature. Compare Curry v. Lasell Seminary Co. 168 Mass. 7 (1897); Hall v. Mount Ida School for Girls, Inc. 258 Mass. 464 (1927); Hood v. Tabor Academy, 296 Mass. 509 (1937). Mandamus does not lie for the vindication of such rights. Parrotta v. Hederson, 315 Mass. 416, 418-419 (1944).

JohnP. Dowcett forthe petitioner. Michael J. Liston for the respondent.

Order sustaining demurrer affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 N.E.2d 833, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 869, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mariani-v-trustees-of-tufts-college-massappct-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack