Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 11/15/1984

Commonwealth v. Preston

Citations

471 N.E.2d 340
393 Mass. 318
1984 Mass. LEXIS 1821

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

\pleadings are to be treated according to their nature and substance rather than their technical form\ [quotation and citation omitted]
pleadings to be treated according to nature and substance rather than technical form
judge did not err in granting new trial under rule 25 [b] [2], even though defendant’s motion filed under rule 30 [b]
neither the Commonwealth nor the defendant objected when the judge reserved judgment on the defendant’s motion at the close of the Commonwealth’s case
\We have long held that pleadings are to be treated according to their nature and substance rather than their technical form\ [quotation and citation omitted]
\We have long held that pleadings are to be treated 'according to their nature and substance' rather than their technical form\ 21 [citation omitted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hennessey, Liacos, Nolan, Lynch, O'Connor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

37 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.