Section 4
- Citation
- Section 4
- Parent Document
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 1985-04-22
Other Sections in This Document (85)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Solomon v. Birger, 477 N.E.2d 137 (1985)
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
- Section 4
Full Text
1,022 charsSection 4 of that agreement calls upon the seller to convey a good and clear record and marketable title, free from encumbrances, except, among other things, provisions of existing building and zoning laws. Section 9, upon which the plaintiffs heavily rely, provides: "Full possession of said premises free of all tenants and occupants ... is to be delivered at the time of the delivery of the deed, said premises to be then (a) in the same condition as they now are reasonable use and wear thereof excepted, and (b) not in violation of said building and zoning laws...." Into this latter section, i.e., § 9, the plaintiffs read a warranty by the sellers that the premises at the time of delivery of the deed will conform to the building code of the city of Newton. If the agreement so warrants, the materials submitted by the plaintiffs in opposition to the defendants' motion for summary judgment are sufficient to raise a question of fact whether at the closing between the parties a building code violation existed.[9]