Prior to the issuance of an execution on an action brought against him, a debtor paid directly to the creditor the amount of his debt which was accepted by the creditor as full payment. This appeal from the dismissal of a petition for a writ of certiorari directed to the determination of costs is utterly without merit.

Order for judgment affirmed.

In essence, the plaintiff's bill alleged that the defendants operated an oil business which constituted a nuisance and was in contravention of the zoning ordinance of Fall River. The judge found that the defendants were entitled to utilize their premises as they were doing and that there was no unreasonable interference "with the rights of the . . . [plaintiff] to the enjoyment of her habitation, or in violation of law." A review of the evidence which is before us demonstrates no error. Ted's Master Serv. Inc. v. Farina Bros. Co. Inc. 343 Mass. 307, 312.

Decree affirmed with costs.

These are three actions of tort involving personal injuries and property damage alleged to have resulted from the defendant renting an automobile in a defective condition to one of the plaintiffs. The plaintiff Ingalls hired an automobile from the defendant which collided with a car driven by the plaintiff Socorelis in which the plaintiff Stevenson was a passenger. The cases were tried together and they are before us on the defendant's

Page 724

exceptions to the admission of an estimate and a repair bill, to the testimony of an expert, and to the denial of the defendant's motions for directed verdicts. We are satisfied that the estimate and the repair bill were business records kept by the defendant in the regular course of its business within the meaning of G. L. c. 233, Section 78, and consequently were properly admitted in evidence. We discern no abuse of the judge's discretion in the admission of the expert's opinion. Commonwealth v. D'Agostino, 344 Mass. 276, 280. Cohen v. Maritime Transp. Co. Inc. 353 Mass. 760, 761. We believe that the jury were warranted in finding that the defendant was negligent in renting the automobile in a defective condition and that such condition was the cause of the accident. There was no error in the judge's refusal to direct verdicts for the defendant.

Exceptions overruled.