Legal Opinion
DeWolfe v. Hingham Centre, Ltd.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided November 9, 2011No. 10-P-473PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtRubin, J.
The plaintiff, Daniel DeWolfe, appeals from an order that granted summary judgment to two defendants, Hing-ham Centre, Ltd. (Hingham Centre), and M. Eileen Richards (collectively, defendants). On appeal, DeWolfe claims the judge relied on inapplicable case law to determine that the defendants owed no duty to DeWolfe and that genuine issues of material fact remain. We vacate the judgment and remand the matter for further proceedings.
1. Background. DeWolfe filed a complaint alleging misrepresentation and a violation of G. L. c. 93A against the defendants. Following discovery, the defendants…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Correllas v. ViveirosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Matthews v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Sheehy v. Lipton Industries, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1987
- Nycal Corp. v. KPMG Peat Marwick LLPMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
- Sound Techniques, Inc. v. HoffmanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- DeWolfe v. Hingham Centre, Ltd.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013