King's Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Poley-Abrams Corp., POLEY-ABRAMS
| Decision Date | 07 July 1982 |
| Docket Number | POLEY-ABRAMS |
| Citation | 386 Mass. 1008,437 N.E.2d 237 |
| Parties | KING'S DEPARTMENT STORES, INC. v.CORPORATION et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Joseph J. Hurley, Boston (Patricia S. Nelson, Boston, with him), for plaintiff.
Barry J. Walker, Farmingham, and Simon Scheff, Boston, for defendants.
Before HENNESSEY, C. J., and WILKINS, ABRAMS, NOLAN and O'CONNOR, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
The plaintiff, King's Department Stores, Inc. (King's), was the original lessee of a building constructed during 1961 and 1962 for use by King's as a department store. The building was owned by Martin E. Cohen and Harold Cohen (Cohens). The Cohens hired Poley-Abrams Corporation (Poley-Abrams) as general contractor for the building. Irving Salsberg and Ralph LeBlanc rendered architectural services in connection with the building, and Benjamin Abrams provided engineering services. Standard International Corp. and Boston Steel Fabricators, Inc., also performed services in connection with this construction. 1
In December, 1969, a portion of the roof of the original building collapsed. On July 6, 1970, the plaintiff sued the Cohens and the individuals and companies who participated in the construction of the building during 1961 and 1962. The plaintiff alleged that their negligence caused the roof to collapse. 2
Prior to trial, Poley-Abrams and Boston Steel Fabricators, Inc., moved to dismiss the actions against them, and Benjamin E. Abrams, Irving Salsberg, Ralph LeBlanc and Standard International Corp. moved for summary judgment. All these defendants claimed that G.L. c. 260, § 2B, barred the plaintiff's action. A judge of the Superior Court agreed and allowed these motions. Because "[t]here [were] no Massachusetts decisions construing the constitutionality of" G.L. c. 260, § 2B, the judge stayed further proceedings in the trial court and reported several questions for interlocutory appeal. Mass.R.Civ.P. 64, 365 Mass. 831 (1965).
The questions reported by the judge have been answered fully in Klein v. Catalano, 386 Mass. 701, 437 N.E.-2d 514 (1982). For the reasons stated in Klein v. Catalano, supra, G.L. c. 260, § 2B, bars the plaintiff's action against those who participated in the design, planning, construction or general administration of the building during 1961 and 1962.
We therefore conclude that the judge properly granted Poley-Abrams's motion to dismiss and Benjamin Abrams's, Irving Salsberg's, and Ralph LeBlanc's motions for summary judgment. Since the judge did not direct the entry of final judgments as to the claims against these defendants, see Mass.R.Civ.P. 54(b), 365 Mass. 820 (1974), we remand this matter to the Superior Court.
In addition, from the record, it is not clear whether Boston Steel Fabricators, Inc., and Standard International...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zapata v. Burns
...1381 (La.1978); Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. v. Coupard, 304 Md. 340, 499 A.2d 178 (1985); Kings Department Stores, Inc. v. Poley-Abrams Corporation, 386 Mass. 1008, 437 N.E.2d 237 (1982); Klein v. Catalano, 386 Mass. 701, 437 N.E.2d 514 (1982); Cliffs Forrest Products Co. v. Al Disdero L......
-
Klein v. Catalano
...his injury. Indeed, this plaintiff forcefully argues the same positions that the lessee argued in King's Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Poley-Abrams Corp., 386 Mass. 1008, 437 N.E.2d 237 (1982).18 A few courts have said that an architect impliedly warrants that his work is fit for its intended use. ......
-
Salinsky v. Perma-Home Corp.
...701, 437 N.E.2d 514 (1982), decided more than a year after the 1981 trial of this case. 8 See also King's Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Poley Abrams Corp., 386 Mass. 1008, 437 N.E.2d 237 (1982). We think that the Klein case applies to the present litigation about the 1958 agreement, which we regard......
-
Dighton v. Federal Pacific Elec. Co.
...building ... or whether they furnished both supplies and engineering or architectural services." King's Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Poley-Abrams Corp., 386 Mass. 1008, 1009, 437 N.E.2d 237 (1982). We indicated, "[t]o the extent that these defendants are materialmen, they are not within the protec......