Free Newsletter
Contract – Equipment rental
Tom Egan//November 16, 2011//
Listen to this article
Where a plaintiff brought a breach of contract action against the defendant mortgage company to recover for payments due for the rental of two pieces of equipment to a developer, a motion by the defendant for summary judgment must be denied in light of a question of fact for the jury as to whether the defendant made a partial payment to the plaintiff to answer for the developer’s debt or to maintain or enhance the value of the property with an eye toward foreclosure.
A.T. Equipment, Inc. v. Cleckley, et al. v. Public Family, Inc., et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-238-11) (8 pages) (Tucker, J.) (Worcester Superior Court) (Civil Action No. 09-01305) (Oct. 24, 2011).
Related Content
Verdicts & Settlements
- Injury during baby’s adenoidectomy leads to stroke
- Construction worker’s hand caught in cement mixer
- Worker trapped in freezer, dies during steam cleaning
- Pedestrian, 69, hit by motor vehicle while in crosswalk
- Four-vehicle pileup leaves driver with spinal cord injury
- Nursing home staff blamed for kidney-failure death
- Pharmacy’s late delivery blamed for patient’s death
- Man, 25, drowns after swimming lesson at fitness club
Opinion Digests
- Jurisdiction – Forum selection clause – Non-signatory
- Criminal – Responsibility
- Attorneys – Lien
- Landlord and tenant – Default judgment
- Zoning – Constructive grant – Comprehensive permit
- Fraud – False Claims Act – Settlement share
- Civil practice – Discovery – Cybersecurity
