Rudnicki v. Hearst Corp.

247 N.E.2d 698, 355 Mass. 800, 1969 Mass. LEXIS 968
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 1, 1969
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 247 N.E.2d 698 (Rudnicki v. Hearst Corp.) 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
Rudnicki v. Hearst Corp., 247 N.E.2d 698, 355 Mass. 800, 1969 Mass. LEXIS 968 (Mass. 1969).

Opinion

In this action of tort each of the three defendants demurred to the declaration, and each demurrer was sustained. The plaintiff demurred to the answers filed by each defendant and these demurrers were overruled. The plaintiff moved for judgment against all the defendants and this motion was denied. From these orders the plaintiff appealed. The order denying the motion for [801]*801judgment was not appealable. Wishnewsky v. Saugus, 325 Mass. 191, 192.

Chester Rudnicki, pro se. Gerald May for The Hearst Corporation. Robert T. Capeless for the Boston Herald-Traveler Corporation. Robert J. Hallisey for the Globe Newspaper Company.

There was no error.

Orders sustaining defendants’ demurrers affirmed.

Orders overruling plaintiff’s demurrers affirmed.

Appeal from order denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment dismissed.

Judgments for defendants.

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

Related

Rollins Environmental Services, Inc. v. Superior Court
330 N.E.2d 814 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
247 N.E.2d 698, 355 Mass. 800, 1969 Mass. LEXIS 968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudnicki-v-hearst-corp-mass-1969.