Pombo v. Mark Equipment Corp.

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Pombo v. Mark Equipment Corp.

296 N.E.2d 509, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 824

CourtMassachusetts Appeals Court

DecidedMay 9, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 296 N.E.2d 509 (Pombo v. Mark Equipment Corp.) 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

Pombo v. Mark Equipment Corp., 296 N.E.2d 509, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 824 (Mass. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an action of tort for conscious suffering and death. The court allowed the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and admitted facts. Prior thereto the plaintiff filed a motion to amend her writ and declaration to add, inter alia, a party defendant. The plaintiffs exception to the trial court’s denial of that motion presents the sole question for decision. Nothing is presented here to take the case out of the general rule that the denial of a motion to amend is discretionary. No abuse of discretion is shown. Urban v. Central Mass. Elec. Co. 301 Mass. 519, 524. The denial of the motion in the absence of findings, rulings or requests for rulings (as in this case) presents no question of law. Keliher v. Champion, 358 Mass. 821.

Exceptions overruled.

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

This is an action of tort for conscious suffering and death. The court allowed the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and admitted facts. Prior thereto the plaintiff filed a motion to amend her writ and declaration to add, inter alia, a party defendant. The plaintiffs exception to the trial court’s denial of that motion presents the sole question for decision. Nothing is presented here to take the case out of the general rule that the denial of a motion to amend is discretionary. No abuse of discretion is shown. Urban v. Central Mass. Elec. Co. 301 Mass. 519, 524. The denial of the motion in the absence of findings, rulings or requests for rulings (as in this case) presents no question of law. Keliher v. Champion, 358 Mass. 821.

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 N.E.2d 509, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pombo-v-mark-equipment-corp-massappct-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack