Abraham Properties, Inc. v. Engineering Design Consultants, Inc.
Massachusetts Superior Court
1Opinion of the Court
Troy, Paul E., J.
The plaintiffs have brought a special motion to dismiss the defendant’s counterclaims pursuant to G.L.c. 231, §59H, commonly known as the “Anti-SLAPP Statute,” and a motion to dismiss pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 9(b). In addition, the third-party defendants have brought a motion to dismiss the third-party plaintiffs complaint. For the reasons more particularly stated below, the special motion to dismiss *679and motion to dismiss the defendant’s counterclaims are ALLOWED in part, and DENIED in part; the motion to dismiss the third-party complaint is DENIED.
Procedural…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Nader v. CitronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
- Friedman v. JablonskiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
- Fabre v. WaltonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.