Toneatti v. Bartelamis

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Toneatti v. Bartelamis

304 N.E.2d 573, 364 Mass. 832

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedDecember 10, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 304 N.E.2d 573 (Toneatti v. Bartelamis) 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

Toneatti v. Bartelamis, 304 N.E.2d 573, 364 Mass. 832 (Mass. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal, pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 109, from an order of the Appellate Division of the District Courts, Southern District, dismissing a report by a District Court judge after trial of an action of tort which arose from an intersection collision of automobiles. The defendants claim error in the judge’s denial of several of their requests for rulings which asserted in substance that the evidence did not warrant findings for the plaintiffs. Our examination of the report shows that the judge found facts which were warranted on the evidence and supported his findings for the plaintiffs, and the order of the Appellate Division dismissing the report was therefore correct. For that reason we are not concerned with the legal reasoning expressed by the Appellate Division in reaching its conclusion (cf. Amsler v. Quincy, 297 Mass. 115 [1937]; Burns v. Winched, 305 Mass. 276 [1940]) and therefore we need not consider the defendants’ arguments as to that reasoning.

Order dismissing report affirmed.

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

This is an appeal, pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 109, from an order of the Appellate Division of the District Courts, Southern District, dismissing a report by a District Court judge after trial of an action of tort which arose from an intersection collision of automobiles. The defendants claim error in the judge’s denial of several of their requests for rulings which asserted in substance that the evidence did not warrant findings for the plaintiffs. Our examination of the report shows that the judge found facts which were warranted on the evidence and supported his findings for the plaintiffs, and the order of the Appellate Division dismissing the report was therefore correct. For that reason we are not concerned with the legal reasoning expressed by the Appellate Division in reaching its conclusion (cf. Amsler v. Quincy, 297 Mass. 115 [1937]; Burns v. Winched, 305 Mass. 276 [1940]) and therefore we need not consider the defendants’ arguments as to that reasoning.

Order dismissing report affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 N.E.2d 573, 364 Mass. 832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toneatti-v-bartelamis-mass-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack