Opinion · Massachusetts Appeals Court
Foley v. McGonigle
3 Mass. App. Ct. 746
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Massachusetts Appeals Court
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts
- Date
- 1975-04-30
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- in easement dispute, "[t]he fact that the plaintiff initiated this proceeding for declaratory relief does not shift th[e] burden to him"
- party asserting benefit of easement retains burden of proof when seeking declaratory relief
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Foley v. McGonigle. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 13 opinions
The defendant, as the party asserting an easement over the lane in question, had the burden of proving the nature and extent of any such easement. Swensen v. Marino, 306 Mass. 582, 583 (1940). Fortier v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc. 307 Mass. 292, 299 (1940). Goldstein v. Beal, 317 Mass. 750, 757 (1945). The fact that the plaintiff initiated this proceeding for declaratory relief does not shift that burden to him. Stop & Shop, Inc. v. Ganem, 347 Mass. 697, 703-704 (1964). That other persons, not before the court, may also have rights of passage over or own portions of the lane does not prevent the adjudication as between the plaintiff and the defendant of the latter’s rights (if any) in such portion of the lane as may be owned by the plaintiff. The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the foregoing.
So ordered.