From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alaimo v. Fredette

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Dec 23, 1976
4 Mass. App. Ct. 866 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)

Opinion

December 23, 1976.

The case was submitted on briefs.

Jonathan B. Hunt for the defendants.

Philip J. Callan, Jr., for the plaintiff.


We do not reach any question of whether the judge might have abused his discretion in denying the defendants' motion under Mass.R.Civ.P. 60(b) (1), 365 Mass. 828 (1974). The judge, who had presided at the trial of the matter, made no findings of fact in connection with his denial of the motion ("After evidentiary hearing — motion denied"). See the last sentence of Mass.R.Civ.P. 52(a), 365 Mass. 816 (1974); Pierce v. Board of Appeals of Carver, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 352, 353, n. 4 (1975). For all that appears, the judge may not have believed some or any of the testimony offered in support of the motion.

Order denying relief from judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Alaimo v. Fredette

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Dec 23, 1976
4 Mass. App. Ct. 866 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
Case details for

Alaimo v. Fredette

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH ALAIMO vs. ARTHUR P. FREDETTE another

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Dec 23, 1976

Citations

4 Mass. App. Ct. 866 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
358 N.E.2d 453

Citing Cases

Pyramid Company of Holyoke v. Oakwood Farms

The judge may have believed, as argued by plaintiff, that Latif's actions were merely to delay the payment of…

Laurin v. Decarolis Construction

The factual assertions of the motion were not supported by affidavit (see Rule 9 of the Superior Court…