Opinion

Pinkowitz v. Edinburg

  • 22 Mass. App. Ct. 180
  • 492 N.E.2d 1153
Court
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Filed
May 19, 1986
Status
Published
Author
Brown
On the bench
Greaney, Brown, Smith
Cited by
6 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.0%

The opinion

Brown, J.

(concurring). I fully agree with the court’s con-

clusion that the defendants’ arguments are without substance. It is fair to infer from the record in this case that once again painfully and regrettably the “hired gun” prototype appears on the scene. See Kennedy v. Kennedy, 20 Mass. App. Ct. 559, 564 (1985) (Brown, J., concurring).

Double costs and substantial counsel fees on appeal are certainly warranted here. I applaud this court’s making manifest its displeasure with lawyers who effect unnecessary delays in legal proceedings in order to shield their clients’ inaction. I also am pleased that this time the court has driven a stake through the heart of that unprofessional, but all too frequent, practice of filing a motion for a continuance “pending the passage of time.”

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.