Savage v. City of Boston
This text of 34 Mass. App. Dec. 124 (Savage v. City of Boston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Action of tort by writ dated February 27, 1963 by Janice D. Savage, p.p.a., in which the plaintiff recovered judgment against the City of Boston in the amount of $409.04 which includes costs and interests.
Prior to. trial, the defendant City of Boston, as third party plaintiff, impleaded August H. Kaufman, Carl P. Coleman and Pauline Wolfson, as Trustees of Coleman Associates, as third party defendants. The third party defendants moved to dismiss “the impleader” against them on the ground that the court is without jurisdiction “over such [125]*125impleader” under, the provisions of G.L.c. 231, §46 and §141 as revised.
The court allowed the motion to dismiss, and the City of Boston being aggrieved by the court’s action brings this report.
There was no error. The right to implead a party is governed by statute, and is found in G.L.c. 231, §48, entitled “Impleader”. Unfortunately, an oversight in drafting the act failed to make it applicable to the District Courts of the Commonwealth. Nor was §141 of G.L.c. 231 entitled “Provisions applicable to District Courts” so amended as to include the above mentioned “Impleader” statute (G.L.c. 231, §38.). As a .consequence the advantages of this Impleader statute are available only in the Superior Court.
See Forty-first Report, Judicial Council of Massachusetts, 1965, pp 25-26;
Report dismissed. ■
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
34 Mass. App. Dec. 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/savage-v-city-of-boston-massdistctapp-1966.