Legal Opinion
McCann v. Davis, Malm & D'Agostine
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 17, 1996PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.
The plaintiff asserts a claim of malpractice and a violation of G. L. c. 93A (1994 ed.), based on the defendant law firm’s conduct in representing him in the sale of his stock in two corporations, Imperial Millwork, Inc. (Imperial), and McCann-Anderson Building Systems, Inc. (Building Systems). The negligence action was tried to a jury. The judge reserved the G. L. c. 93A claim for his determination.
*559The jury, by a special jury verdict, found that the defendant law firm was negligent in its representation of the plaintiff but that the firm’s negligence was not “the proximate cause of the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fishman v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Massachusetts Farm Bureau Federation, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Massachusetts, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Swanson v. Bankers Life Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
3Cited by23 opinions
- Cummings v. HPG International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- Walsh v. Teltech Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- Meyer v. WagnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
- Small Justice LLC v. Xcentric Ventures LLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2017
- Baghdady v. Lubin & Meyer, P.C.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.