Legal Opinion
Miller v. Fickett
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided February 25, 2000No. 98-P-1120PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGillerman, J.
The plaintiffs appeal from a separate and final (summary) judgment entered in favor of Remax New Horizons (Remax) and Suanne DeFrancesco on a twenty-five count complaint.3 We affirm.
DeFrancesco and her principal, Remax, were acting as sales agents for Darryl and Kathleen Fickett, the owners of a house *655in Plympton which was being offered for sale. The plaintiffs were interested in the property and had been invited to view the house.
DeFrancesco and Remax, as brokers for the owners showing the house to prospective buyers, owed the potential buyers who visited the premises the common-law duty to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hopkins v. Fox & Lazo RealtorsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
- Davis v. Westwood GroupMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
- Scott v. ThompsonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1977
3Cited by4 opinions
- Carcillo v. National Hockey LeagueDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2021
- DiMauro v. Stop & Shop Companies, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2002
- Miller v. FickettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
- New London County Insurance v. Broan Nutone, LLCMassachusetts Superior Court · 2006