Legal Opinion
Joseph A. Fortin Construction, Inc. v. Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided July 11, 1984PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHennessey, C.J.
A judge of the Superior Court allowed the defendant’s motion for summary judgment against the plaintiffs, on the basis that the action was barred by the statute of limitations, G. L. c. 260, § 2A. The plaintiffs appealed and the Appeals Court reversed the judgment. Joseph A. Fortin Constr. Co. v. Massachusetts Pious. Fin. Agency, 17 Mass. App. Ct. 911 (1983). The Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) filed a petition for further appellate review with this court and it was granted. We agree with the Appeals Court and conclude MHFA’s motion for summary judgment based on the expiration of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hendrickson v. SearsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- White v. Peabody Construction Co., Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Dinsky v. Town of FraminghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Cannon v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Lewis v. CorbinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Riley v. PresnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,310 Joseph L. Maggio v. Gerard Freezer & Ice Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
- International Mobiles Corp. v. Corroon & Black/Fairfield & Ellis, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1990
- Teresa Tagliente, Trustee of the Tagliente Family Trust v. David C. HimmerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Taygeta Corp. v. Varian Associates, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.