From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dillon v. Claman

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Nov 23, 1976
357 N.E.2d 19 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)

Opinion

November 23, 1976.

The case was submitted on briefs.

Walter J. Griffin Lawrence H. Fisher for the plaintiffs.

Stanley B. Milton William C. O'Neil, Jr., for the defendants.


It is clear from the master's subsidiary findings (see particularly par. 15) and the exhibits attached to his report (see particularly exhibit C) that the broker was the agent of the plaintiffs and not of the defendants. See Gil-Bern Constr. Corp. v. Medford, 357 Mass. 620, 622-623 (1970), and cases cited therein. Nothing contained in the record disputes the defendants' contention that there was no writing (see particularly general finding number 4: "plaintiffs have failed to produce a writing . . .") sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds (G.L.c. 259, § 1).

Judgments affirmed with double costs.


Summaries of

Dillon v. Claman

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Nov 23, 1976
357 N.E.2d 19 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
Case details for

Dillon v. Claman

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS F.J. DILLON another vs. SIDNEY CLAMAN another (and a companion case)

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Nov 23, 1976

Citations

357 N.E.2d 19 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
357 N.E.2d 19