Legal Opinion

Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 25, 1998PublishedCited by 219 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.

We are asked to determine whether the defendants’ special motions to dismiss pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 59H, commonly referred to as the anti-SLAPP statute, are applicable to the plaintiff’s claim that the defendant, Francis E. Marino, breached a confidentiality agreement with it, and other related claims, and if so, whether the statutory procedure for early dismissal of such claims is constitutional. We conclude that the Legislature did not intend the anti-SLAPP statute to apply to claims such as those in this case, a result also reached by the Appeals Court in a thoughtful opinion. See…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. McDonald v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Wilcox v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Commonwealth v. WeloskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
  5. Clegg v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by219 opinions

  1. Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Sandholm v. KueckerIllinois Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Fabre v. WaltonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
  4. General Electric Co. v. Department of Environmental ProtectionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  5. Office One, Inc. v. LopezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002

214 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API