TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Saba v. Khouri

George Saba v. John Khouri

Saba v. Khouri, 260 N.E.2d 649 (Mass. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 11, 1970
Citations
260 N.E.2d 649357 Mass. 783

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

At the original trial of this action (described as an action of contract but actually one in tort for deceit) in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston, the trial judge made a finding for the plaintiff. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial which the judge denied. The Appellate Division ordered a new trial. At the second trial before another judge there was a finding for the defendant. The sole issue before us is whether the Appellate Division was in error in vacating the finding for the plaintiff in the first trial and ordering a new trial. We are satisfied from our review of the record that the Appellate Division was warranted in ordering a new trial to prevent a miscarriage of justice. See G. L. c. 231, § 108; Tuttle v. Brown, 10 Cush. 262 , 264-265.

Orders of Appellate Division affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1976: 11978: 11980: 11999: 119762026peak 1976 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Torre v. Harris-Seybold Co.404 N.E.2d 96 (Mass. App. Ct. 1980)
  2. Evans v. Multicon Construction Corp.375 N.E.2d 338 (Mass. App. Ct. 1978)
  3. Hancock Machine Shop, Inc. v. Vigoda58 Mass. App. Dec. 149 (1976)
  4. Mailloux v. Dorian1999 Mass. App. Div. 191 (1999)

Most recent

  1. Mailloux v. Dorian1999 Mass. App. Div. 191 (1999)
  2. Torre v. Harris-Seybold Co.404 N.E.2d 96 (Mass. App. Ct. 1980)
  3. Evans v. Multicon Construction Corp.375 N.E.2d 338 (Mass. App. Ct. 1978)
  4. Hancock Machine Shop, Inc. v. Vigoda58 Mass. App. Dec. 149 (1976)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list