History
  • No items yet
midpage
Haddad v. Board of Appeals
355 N.E.2d 492
Mass. App. Ct.
1976
Check Treatment

It is impossible to give intelligent consideration to any of the plaintiffs’ contentions without (a) the trial transcript and (b) the unanswered demands for admissions of fact which the judge made parts of his findings. None of that material has been reproduced in the plaintiffs’ appendix, and “we see no occasion to send for the original papers in order to discover whether there is any merit to the ... [plaintiffs’] contentions.” Slater v. Burnham Corp. ante, 791 (1976). See also Storer v. Anderson, ante, 809 (1976).

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Haddad v. Board of Appeals
Court Name: Massachusetts Appeals Court
Date Published: Oct 14, 1976
Citation: 355 N.E.2d 492
Court Abbreviation: Mass. App. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.