Rose v. Rusiecki

182 N.E.2d 534, 344 Mass. 752
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 2, 1962
StatusPublished

This text of 182 N.E.2d 534 (Rose v. Rusiecki) 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
Rose v. Rusiecki, 182 N.E.2d 534, 344 Mass. 752 (Mass. 1962).

Opinion

Amended decision affirmed. The only issue raised by this appeal

from a decision as amended of the Land Court, ordering the registration of the locus, is the location of the south boundary. We apply the standards of review set out in Cerel v. Framingham, 342 Mass. 17, and Ide v. Bowden, 342 Mass. 22, We have examined the decision which includes the observations made and conclusions reached by a registered land surveyor as the result of detailed research and field work on the locus. We have considered the numerous documents incorporated in the decision by reference. We see no error in the establishment of the south boundary. It is unnecessary to consider the question of adverse possession.

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

Related

Ide v. Bowden
172 N.E.2d 88 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1961)
Cerel v. Town of Framingham
171 N.E.2d 840 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 N.E.2d 534, 344 Mass. 752, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-rusiecki-mass-1962.