Weinrebe v. Coffman

263 N.E.2d 454, 358 Mass. 247, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 721
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedNovember 3, 1970
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 N.E.2d 454 (Weinrebe v. Coffman) 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
Weinrebe v. Coffman, 263 N.E.2d 454, 358 Mass. 247, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 721 (Mass. 1970).

Opinion

Cutter, J.

A Superior Court judge sustained a demurrer to an amended bill in equity. The plaintiff appeals from a final decree dismissing the bill.

Attached to the bill as an exhibit is a plan showing the lots hereafter described. The plaintiff owns parcel P-1 on the north side of School Street, with its street frontage at 13 to 15 School Street, Boston, a short distance west of Washington Street, which runs north and south. The defendant owns parcel D on the west side of Washington Street. Parcel D has its street access at 263 to 265 Washington Street. Parcel P-1 and parcel D adjoin each other at the rear of each parcel. The bill alleges essentially these facts and also the matters set out below.

On February 21, 1956, by deed dated December 28, 1954, Post Publishing Company (Post) conveyed parcel P-1, and the buildings thereon, to one Coppola by a deed1 which described parcel P-1 by metes and bounds. These corresponded with the measurements shown on the plan, with the addition of the words “[o]r however otherwise said premises may be bounded or described and be all or any of said measurements more or less.” The specific measurements included only the area shown on the plan as parcel P-1. The measurements did not include the surface (or any part) of parcel P-2, about six feet by twenty-nine feet, constituting a sub-basement area substantially below street level. On May 2, 1963, “one Diab, the then owner by suc[249]*249cessive conveyances of . . . Q)]arcel P-1 (the language of all . . . interim conveyances being substantially identical to that of . . . [the deed to Coppola]), conveyed” parcel P-1 to the plaintiff. Post remained the owner of parcel D until March 18, 1958, when there was recorded a deed to the defendant which included parcel D? executed by the trustees [250]*250in bankruptcy of Post (see fn. 1). This deed appears to include in parcel D parcel P-2 within its description by metes and bounds, although these are not shown in figures on the plan attached to the bill.

[249]*249

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

Related

Coburn v. Gould
338 N.E.2d 852 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
263 N.E.2d 454, 358 Mass. 247, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weinrebe-v-coffman-mass-1970.