Case law

Boston & Maine Railroad v. Brown

81 Mass. 223 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 15, 1860

Brown v. Abington Savings Bank

119 Mass. 69 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 30, 1875

Brown v. Goldthwaite Furniture Co.

186 Mass. 51 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 20, 1904

Brown v. City of Lowell

49 Mass. 172 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1844

.■ In Callender v. … Harrington v. County Commissioners, 22 Pick. 263.

Robinson v. Wm. Brown & Sons Co.

301 Mass. 316 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 25, 1938

Inc. v. Pitt, 230 Mass. 526 . Matson v. Sbrega, 250 Mass. 138 . Endicott Johnson Corp. v. Hurwitz, 284 Mass. 378 . See Buchannan v. Meisner, 279 Mass. 457, 458-459 . Appeal dismissed.

Young v. Planning Board

402 Mass. 841 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 13, 1988

See Kay-Vee Realty Co. v. … Co. v. Board of Appeals of Hingham, 3 Mass. App.

Doe, Sex Offender Registry Board No. 68549 v. Sex Offender Registry Board

470 Mass. 102 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 5, 2014

See Moe v. … Goldberg v. Board of Health of Granby, 444 Mass. 627, 638 (2005), quoting Commissioner of Revenue v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 423 Mass. 42, 43 (1996).

Essex County Retirement Board v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

342 Mass. 322 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 30, 1961

See Bell v. Treasurer of Cambridge, 310 Mass. 484, 490 ; Harby v. Los Angeles, 64 Cal. App. 2d 911, 915 ; Pauley v. Noeppel, 1 Misc. 2d (N. Y.) 928, 931. It is also plain that this was with moral turpitude on his part. … Kennedy v. Holyoke, 312 Mass. 248, 251 . The reemployment for three days in 1957 was inconsequential. It did not reestablish the forfeited rights. Decree affirmed.

Brown v. Quincy Mutual Fire Insurance

105 Mass. 396 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1870

Brown v. Green & Hickey Leather Co.

244 Mass. 168 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 1, 1923

Peoples National Bank v. Mulholland, 228 Mass. 152 . The validity of trust receipts, such as were given by the defendant in the case at bar, cannot be questioned. Moors v. Drury, 186 Mass. 424 . Peoples National Bank v. … Moors v. Wyman, 146 Mass. 60 .

Brown v. A. W. Perry Co.

325 Mass. 479 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 8, 1950

McCarthy v. Isenberg Bros. Inc. 321 Mass. 170, 172 . … Garland v. Stetson, 292 Mass. 95, 100, 101 . Richmond v. Warren Institution for Savings, 307 Mass. 483 . Greenway Wood Heel Co. Inc. v. John Shea Co. 313 Mass. 177, 183, 184 . Carroll v. Hemenway, 315 Mass. 45, 46 .

Brown v. City of Lawrence

120 Mass. 1 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 1, 1876

argued on behalf of the plaintiff, that the act of making such repairs is only an implied admission of the continued existence of the way, and is one mode of proof of the defendant’s recognition of it as such; Commonwealth v.

Corcoran v. Planning Board

406 Mass. 248 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 13, 1989

See McCarthy v. Planning Bd. of Edgartown, 381 Mass. 86 (1980) (frontage on limited access highway does not trigger exemption); Rettig v. … Regs. § 10.55(4)(b) (1987). 4 Gifford was not intended to broaden significantly the powers of planning boards. See Gallitano v. Board of Survey & Planning of Waltham, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 269, 273 (1980).

Old Colony Trust Co. v. Brown

287 Mass. 177 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 26, 1934

Brown still lives, and claims the entire trust fund, to the exclusion of Mildred P. Wark, formerly Mildred P.' … Brown and the executrix of the will of Henry Sargent, junior. Mary S. Brown appealed.

Richard v. Retirement Board

431 Mass. 163 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 7, 2000

Her application was denied by the Worcester retirement board, a decision subsequently affirmed by the Contributory Retirement Appeal Board (board). … The plaintiff appealed from the board’s decision to the Superior Court pursuant to G.

Easthampton Contributory Retirement Board v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

347 Mass. 777 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 28, 1964

The respondent appeal board, after several hearings, reversed the decision of the Easthampton contributory retirement board on July 17, 1959, ruling that Stone died of a heart attack while engaged in the performance of his … See Teachers’ Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd. 346 Mass. 663 . Compare State Bd. of Retirement v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd. 342 Mass. 58 .

Planning Board of Peabody v. Board of Appeals of Peabody

358 Mass. 81 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 2, 1970

The notice to affected property owners and to the planning board must be mailed by the board of appeals. The board cannot delegate that duty to the petitioner or his attorney. Kane v. … Rousseau v. Building Inspector of Fram-ingham, 349 Mass. 31, 37 , and cases cited. Gallagher v. Board of Appeals of Falmouth, 351 Mass. 410, 414 . 2.

St. George Greek Orthodox Cathedral of Western Massachusetts, Inc. v. Fire Department

462 Mass. 120 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 4, 2012

No. 10800 v. … Andrade v. City Council of Gloucester, 406 Mass. 337, 338 (1989). It is of no moment that the code is promulgated by the board rather than directly by the Legislature. See Boston Gas Co. v.

Brown v. Holyoke Water Power Co.

157 Mass. 280 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 21, 1892

Preble v. Baldwin, 6 Cush. 549 . Carr v. Dooley, 119 Mass. 294 . Skilton v. Roberts, 129 Mass. 306 . Flynn v. Bourneuf, 143 Mass. 277 . Graffam v. Pierce, 143 Mass. 386 . Simanovich v. Wood, 145 Mass. 180 . … See Fiacre v. Chapman, 5 Stew. 463 ; Simmons v. Lyle, 32 Grat. 752, 763; Greenwell v. Heritage, 71 Mo. 459 ; Ætna Ins. Co. v. Middleport, 124 U. S. 534 ; Hermanns v. Fanning, 151 Mass. 1 ; Wallace v. Conrad, 3 Nat.

Great Barrington Savings Bank v. Brown

239 Mass. 546 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 11, 1921

It was said in Hoffman v. … Hoffman v. Charlestown Five Cents Savings Bank, supra, and Morse v. Stober, 233 Mass. 223 , cited by the defendant, are distinguishable in their facts from those in the present case. See Kendall v. Bolster, ante, 152.