Legal Opinion
Doe v. Nutter, McClennen & Fish
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided August 16, 1996No. 95-P-1341PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPorada, J.
After a separate and final judgment was entered in the Superior Court dismissing plaintiffs’ claims against the defendant law firm, Nutter, McClennen & Fish (NMF), and one of its partners, Attorney Alan Rose, for violation of G. L. c. 93 A, violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiffs filed this appeal. The plaintiffs’ claims arose out of a response by the defendant Rose on behalf of a client, South Shore Neurology Associates, Inc. (South Shore), to a thirty-day G. L. c. 93A demand letter that the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Correllas v. ViveirosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Kevin Frazier v. Edward N. BaileyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Fishman v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Nemeroff v. AbelsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Kurker v. HellMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Fisher v. LintMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Van Christo Advertising, Inc. v. M/A-COM/LCSMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
- Bartle v. BerryMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- In re CobbMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.