From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Peters v. Archambault
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
361 Mass. 91, 278 N.E.2d 729 (1972)
Archambault (defendant) unknowingly purchased a home in which the previous owners had mistakenly built a portion of the house on an adjacent lot. Peters (plaintiff) purchased the house on the adjacent lot and, after surveying his land for the purpose of erecting a retaining wall, learned of the encroachment. Peters filed an injunction against Archambault to have the encroaching portion removed. The trial court found that, while it would be very expensive to remove the encroaching portion of Archambault’s house, it should be removed. Archambault appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Cutter, J.)
Dissent (Tauro, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.